An Evaluative Study of a Unit Based on the Nazi Holocaust : Implications for the Design of Interdisciplinary Curricula

Home , Lebensborn, Not the Actual Events, The Seven

University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst

Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014

1-1-1979 An evaluative study of a unit based on the Nazi Holocaust : implications for the design of interdisciplinary curricula. Roselle Chartock University of Massachusetts Amherst

Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1

Recommended Citation Chartock, Roselle, "An evaluative study of a unit based on the Nazi Holocaust : implications for the design of interdisciplinary curricula." (1979). Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014. 3482. https://scholarworks.umass.edu/dissertations_1/3482

This Open Access Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Doctoral Dissertations 1896 - February 2014 by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected].

AN EVALUATIVE STUDY OF A UNIT BASED ON THE NAZI HOLOCAUST: IMPLI CATIONS FOR THE DESIGN OF INTERDISCIPLINARY CURRICULA

A Dissertation Presented

ROSELLE KLINE CHARTOCK

Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of

DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

September, 1979

School of Education Roselle Kline Chartock 1979

ii AN EVALUATIVE STUDY OF A UNIT BASED ON THE NAZI HOLOCAUST: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE DESIGN OF INTERDISCIPLINARY CURRICULA

A Dissertation Presented

ROSELLE KLINE CHARTOCK

Approved as to style and content by:

/Judithe Spe&del, Chairperson of Committee

Michael Greenebaum, Member vi Sheldon Goldman, Member

Mario Fantini, School of Education

iii DEDICATION

To Alan, my constant source of encouragement and love.

iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I owe special thanks to Professor Judithe Speidel. Her creativity and critical insights guided me and helped to shape this dissertation. It is not possible to think about these last five years without also remembering her encouraging words and gestures.

I am also grateful to Professor Michael Greenebaum for the intellectual stimulus which provided me with a desire to strive for excellence. Professor Sheldon Goldman, political scientist, has served as a source of inspiration also, and I am grateful to him for his support and constant interest in this project.

The Berkshire Hills Regional School District School Committee granted me a sabbatical from my teaching duties for the school year 1977-78 and, in so doing, enabled me to carry on my research for this evaluative study. I thank them for making the time available to me.

The Anti -Defamation League of B'nai B'rith was kind enough to lend moral and financial support.

Sally Powell, a graduate student at the University of Massachu- setts, was an invaluable consultant in the area of statistics. Her skills and understanding helped me gain access to the language of the computer and statistical analyses.

And for her patient attention to detail I want to praise the skilled typist of this manuscript and the several drafts that pre- ceded it. Marion Grossetti has performed a mighty task.

Last, but never least my family, husband and children, deserve special recognition. It is not possible to express adequately the

v Joy and richness that Alan, Jonas, and Sarah provided throughout this project.

Not only am I grateful for the help and support of the people mentioned earlier, but also I want to express thanks to friends, colleagues, and others who in a number of ways transmitted concern for my work and an interest in the goals of education expressed herein.

vi ABSTRACT

An Evaluative Study of a Unit Based on the Nazi Holocaust: triplications for the Design of Interdisciplinary Curricula

(September 1979) Roselle Kline Chartock, B.S., Skidmore College

M.A., Hunter College, Ed.D. , University of Massachusetts

Directed by: Professor Judithe Speidel

The secondary schools responsible for educating our future problem solvers do not, for the most part, offer courses that facilitate interdisciplinary thinking. Perhaps this situation exists because most high school curricula are structured departmentally with subjects organized into separate disciplines. Consequently, students have little or no opportunity for learning about relationships among the various components of these separate subject areas or for learning how to synthesize methods and ideas from various disciplines in order to solve problems. This study deals with a unit based on the Nazi

Holocaust, an example of an interdisciplinary curriculum that utilizes a convergence approach. Through the use of evaluative instruments the researcher tried to determine what changes in students' learning and attitudes occurred as a result of the unit and to describe what teaching approaches were used. The instruments were designed to help answer four research questions: l) What are students learning as a result of exposure to an interdisciplinary curriculum? 2) Can the teaching of an interdisciplinary unit help students apply interdisciplinary concepts and problem-solving approaches to historical and contemporary issues as well as to their own lives? 3) What changes in

vii —

attitude results? U) What are the characteristics and methodologies Of those teachers who are implementing the unit?

The pre- and post-tests consisted of two attitude scales, one measuring anti-Semitic attitudes, the other measuring anti-democratic attitudes, and four knowledge or essay questions designed to measure the students' ability to integrate ideas from several perspectives in order to explain and resolve historical and contemporary problems. The tests were given to l6U students in an experimental group that received the Holocaust treatment and to 78 students in a population which did not receive instruction related to the unit.

Four teachers were involved in the instruction of the unit and in the administration of the tests to the experimental group. They were interviewed both before and after the implementation of the seven-week unit on their teaching objectives, backgrounds and attitudes, and methodologies.

Students in the experimental group demonstrated a gain in mean scores on all four knowledge questions from pre- to post-test. This group showed a significantly greater gain (at the .01 level) than did the control group on the essay question dealing with the Holocaust as approached from an interdisciplinary perspective.

An F-test to determine the degree of variance between the two groups on the pre-test showed the two groups —experimental and control not to be significantly different in attitude on both scales. The difference between the two groups on the post-test attitudes toward Jews, however, was shown to be significant at the .01 level, indicating a reduction in anti-Semitic attitudes on the part of the experimental group.

viii On the anti-democratic attitudes scale no significant increase or decrease in scores occurred from pre- to post-test. I„ reference to the effects of intervening variables on attitude gain, an F-test shoved that when sex was entered alone and looked at for its affect on more positive attitudes tovard Jevs . there vas a significant difference be- tveen males and females in the experimental group, females shoving a greater increase in tolerance.

Above average students (based on social studies achievement tests and grade point averages) vithin only the experimental group demonstrated a significantly greater increase in knovledge than the average students, vhereas the average group decreased significantly on the anti Semitism scale.

The information gained from this study can be useful to teachers and/or administrators in restructuring curricula so that more attempts to integrate the disciplines can be stimulated, thereby providing students with more opportunities to better understand and possibly solve a wide range of problems by using the convergence approach. Specializi tion is necessary if we are to push forward the frontiers of knowledge but most modern social problems cut across traditional disciplines.

Causes, effects, and solutions are to be discovered only through the probing and synthesis of a number of academic specialties. The challenge now lies in making the collaboration between traditional programming and interdisciplinary studies more systematic and widespread.

ix .

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENT . . .

LIST OF TABLES AND DIAGRAMS.

Chapter I INTRODUCTION ****••••• I Statement of the Problem 1 Significance and .***’* Scope of the Study. £ Definitions £

Interdisciplinary Defined * Interdisciplinary Curriculum With a Problem-' orientation Approach: The Holocaust Unit . 15 Why the Problem-orientation Approach is the Focus of this Study 2h How the Four Research Questions can Lead to Data about the Effects of the Holocaust Unit on Students . Limitations of the Study ’ ’ 30 Organization of the Study * 31

II. A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE RELATED TO INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES 31*

Philosophical and Psychological Studies 3I*

Practical Studies 1*7 Holocaust-related Studies with an Interdisciplinary Problem-orientation .... 57 Ongoing Programs Described in the Literature: Inter- and Intradepartmental in Nature. ... 60

III. DESCRIPTION OF AN INTERDISCIPLINARY UNIT ON THE HOLOCAUST: SOCIETY ON TRIAL. 72

Topical Outline of the Ideas Taken up in the Unit, "Society on Trial: A Study of the Nazi Holocaust" 80 Sections of the Teacher's Guide 86 Introduction to the Guide and Text 89 Teaching the Holocaust 93 Moral Education and the Holocaust Unit 93 An Example of an Interdisciplinary Problem

Within the Holocaust Unit: Dehumanization. . 101

x .

IV. PROCEDURES 107 Subjects Instruments 107 110 Research Questions 111 Pilot Test of Instruments and Rater Training; Procedures for Administration of Pre- and Post-Tests 122 Reliability and Validity of Instrument 125 Statistical Measures .... 127 V. RESULTS OF THE STUDY. 130 Research Question #1 130 Research Question #2 138 Research Question #3 1U0 Research Question fth 1U9

VI. IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY 155

BIBLIOGRAPHY 175

APPENDIX . 188

A. Grouping Disciplines According to Six Realms of Meaning 188 B. Article on Teaching the Holocaust: Methodology 190 C. Memorandum to Teachers About to Administer Pre-Tests 206 D. A Sample Copy of the Pre-Test Given to Students 210 E. Results of (Responses to) the Initial Interview and Post-Interview with Teachers of the Holocaust 219 F. Answer Key and Memoranda Provided for the Raters 23^ G. Problem-solving Methodologies 2U8 H. Interdisciplinary Studies Compared with Traditional Designs 25^

xi LIST OF TABLES

1 . Mea e T tal Sc °reS for Knowledge (Essay) VarL^r e ? 1.1. T t l G o p c:ni^ a^ps ? ? . : ? : ,L32 Mean Scores on the Gains for Knowledge (Essay)

. 133 2 s ° f Total 3.1.' X^“" Pre - and p°^«t . 134 3* Frequency Distribut ions for Gains in Total Essay Score. . 135 Frequency Distributions for Gains on Individual Essayy Questions A, B, and C.l . 136 Fre uenc Distributions for n5 ? Gains—*“ w on Essay ^uesxionQuestion 0.2.p ( nT,y._n , T (Unrelated Issues — dump, bypass)

Mean of the Total Scores for Attitude Variables for Total Group, Experimental 6.1. Group, and Control Group.. 142 5-1. Mean Scores on the Gains for Attitude Variables Total for Group, Experimental Group, and Control Group . 142 6. Frequency Distributions on Pre-Tests and Post-Tests for Public Opinions . . 144 Frequency Distributions on Gain Scores ini Public Opinions .... 144

7. Frequency Distributions on Pre-Test and Post-Test for Attitudes Toward Jews 145

7*1. Frequency Distributions for Gain Scores in Attitudes Toward Jews . 1*5

xii DIAGRAMS

1 . e li Means for the Three-Way Analysis of Variance or Subgroups Based on Sex and Period of the Day for Both Experimental and Control Groups and Based on Group Level for Experimental Group Only . . .1U8

xiii CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Statement of the Problem

"It gets pretty depressing to vatch what is going on in the world and realize that your education is not equipping you to do anything about it."

- 1 From a letter by a University of California senior -

What this student is saying is that her education isn’t preparing her to deal with real problems. Although this comment came from a college student who just completed her general education,

it could just as easily have come from a high school senior just

processed through a similar traditional structure based on the

separation of knowledge into bits and pieces. John D. Haas, Dir-

ector of the Center for Education in the Social Sciences at the

University of Colorado, offers a possible reason for this student's

frustration:

Fragmented and compartmentalized knowledge is still the mode for knowledge production and the model for dealing with social problems and for organizing curricula. The societal problems of the 60's are still with us: racism, poverty, inequality, and pol-

itical corruption . . . and as individuals we still search for wholeness while the educational system perpetuates fragmentation.

A complex technological society requires interdisciplinary solutions to its problems. Our schools, however, tend to promote

^John Fischer, "Survival U. : Prospectus for a Really Relevant University," Harper 1 s (September, I969K 12. p John D. Haas, "For Lack of a Loom: Problems in Integrating Knowledge," School Science and Mathematics, vol. 75 (January, 1975 )> 9 *

1 specialization. Tbe focus of the specials! is usually on a„ established heirarchy of ideas and not on problems and issues relevant to the needs of American society. The secondary schools that are responsible for educating our future problem-solvers do not. for the most part, offer courses that might facilitate interdisciplinary thinking. Perhaps this situation exists because most high school curricula are structured departmentally , that is. the subject matter is organized into separate disciplines. Consequent- ly, students have little or no opportunity for learning about the relationships that exist among the various components of these separate subject areas or for learning how to synthesize methods and ideas from various disciplines in order to solve problems. I have observed students with limited abilities to make relationships between what they are learning within the walls of school and what is going on outside, in the world, in the communities, in other classes, and especially in their own lives. As a result of my observations I believe there is a need to re-think and reorganize educational curricula along interdisciplinary lines. The development of interdisciplinary courses can lead to more successful education for students who are often unable to interrelate their studies. This is not to say that the disciplines have no value. There may be certain advantages to the discipline-based system. However, the world is not a compartmentalized structure, but a complex structure made up of interdependent parts. It can, therefore, be somewhat artificial to organize ideas into rigid disciplines.

From my twelve years of teaching experience on the elementary, junior high, and high school levels, I have come to believe there is 3

a need in our schools today for structuring supplementary curricula along interdisciplinary lines, perhaps now more than ever before, in light of technological, social and political revolutions. I n addition to the subject matter of the disciplines there must also be material which will help students bridge the gaps that exist between the ideas they learn in school and what goes on in the world outside of school. Such a dualistic approach has been suggested by Howard Radest of Ramapo College, who does not believe disciplinary activity is a prerequisite for interdisciplinary activity. He states:

For instance, the problem of ill health feeds upon the work of non-medical inquiries and would be impossible without them. It is therefore irresponsible to call, as some do, for dispensing with all disciplinary inquiry in the name of innovation, novelty, and relevance. To do so is to insure . . . the impoverishment of this type of interdisciplinary study. While it is not very neat, this suggests a dualistic educational philosophy in which a curricular structure must emerge that is both problem- centered and disciplinary in order for interdisciplinarity to have a useful content. 3

After a thorough review of the literature and a review of pub- lisher's catalogues listing high school texts in several disciplines,

I have concluded that approaches to interdisciplinary curricula on the secondary level are scarce. Similarly, the literature reveals very little organized evaluation of the few interdisciplinary units that do exist. Few people have attempted to analyze and evaluate either the components of interdisciplinary curricula or the variables that are most responsible for student and teacher success in reaching the goals of such material. Apparently no reference has been made to instruments developed for the purpose of determining

o Howard B. Radest, "On Interdisciplinary Education," in Sidney of the Curriculum: The Need for Gen- Hook , et al ( eds . ) The Philosophy eral Education (Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books, 1975) > 232. u changes in students' learning as a result of their exposure to the interdisciplinary curricula discussed in the articles (See "Review of the Literature"). Because of this lack of data, I decided to examine the interdisciplinary nature and outcomes of the Holocaust unit that my colleagues and I designed for the Social Studies curricula of Monument Mountain Regional High School, in Great Barrington, Massachu- setts. This original unit explores man's inhumanity to man, particularly during World War II, when the Nazis and their collaborators destroyed six million Jews and six million non-Jews. The unit contains concepts and problems that can be understood and solved by students through the integration of ideas from several disciplines; and, thus, it is an example of material with a "problem-orientation approach." It is just one of several manifestations of interdisciplinary curricula. In addition to embodying concepts from the many disciplines within the social sciences (i.e. psychology, philosophy, history, political science, sociology, economics, and geography), the unit also draws on illustrations and ideas from music, science, art, and literature.

Following our development of the material, my colleagues and I spoke to educators in several cities on this tob-long neglected aspect of history. A pilot project was carried out using our curriculum materials; and subsequently the New York Times (October, 1976),

Social Education (April, 1978), Massachusetts Teacher (May, 1978),

brought and the NEA Journal, Today's Education ( February-March , 1979) »

the the material to the attention of their readers. In my own school

their fresh- unit is taught to a majority of ninth graders as part of one-hundred man history course. The curriculum text, made up of over .

excerpts from primary and secondary sources, „as publlshed in Novem_ *er, 1978, by Bantam Books and the Anti-Defa-nation League. The title “ ^ evaluatlve 6tudy aes _ cnbed herein uas designed to examine the interdisciplinary nature of the Holocaust unit, its objectives, the variety of „ays it has been implemented, and the qualities that make it unique. With evaluative instruments I devised, I tried to determine what changes in students learning and attitudes occur as a result of the unit and vhat teaching approaches are used. I hetranDegan thiQ <=+ * , this study by posing four research questions:

1 t 1 ents * learn ing as a result of ? l ? exposure to an interdisciplinary| curriculum?

a. What substantive knowledge are they gaining? . Are students able to use knowledge from several disciplines to solve problems and explain conceptsy presented m the unit?

2 the * ea= hln of an ' interdisciplinary unit help apply»^ ? students interdisciplinary concepts and problem-solving proaches ap- to historical and contemporary issues?

3 . What changes in attitude result?

h. What are the characteristics and methodologies of those teachers who are implementing the unit?

The first three research questions imply three of the unit's majo

objectives . I constructed pre- and post-tests in order to derive data with which to answer these inquiries. Through observations in the classrooms and interviews with teachers, I addressed the fourth research question concerning teacher methodology and characteristics

Monument Mountain Regional High School was the laboratory in which I

Roselle Chartock and Jack Spencer, eds. The Holocaust Years: Society on Trial (New York: Bantam Books, 1978)" 6 carried out an investigation of the questions. Acting as a control group were students from a high school also located in Berkshire County. Significance and Scope of the Study

The immediate reason for carrying out an evaluative study of the Holocaust curriculum is to find out whether or not the unit fulfills some of the objectives spelled out by its author-teachers. The broader reason for such a study, however, relates to the implications that the answers to all of these questions will have for the design of interdisciplinary curricula with a problem-orientation approach.

At this point, it is necessary to explain why the two goals of this study gathering data showing the effects of an interdisciplinary curriculum and using such data to expand insights into the nature and design of such curricula—are worthy of pursuit. In order to do so,

I will first define the key terms contained in the first three research questions. These terms include: discipline , int erdisciplinary , curricula problem-orientation , , problem-solving , attitudes , and contemporary issues . I will also show how the Holocaust unit fulfills the problem-orientation definition of interdisciplinary curricula.

In addition, I will explain why this particular orientation is the focus of my study and merits further exploration; and, finally, I will show how the four research questions are useful in carrying out the goals of this study.

Definitions

to the First of all , what is meant by discipline? According literature, discipline usually refers to a particular structure of organizing ideas which makes the ideas meaningful and useful (Tyler, »

T 1971; Kuhn, 1970; Phenix, 1 6U ) . 9 Further, a discipline is character-

ized by specialized vocabulary, a mode of inquiry, defined content, and the strong vested interests of the specialists in that field. 5 In still other terms, a discipline is a body of knowledge organized in a sequential, hierarchical fashion. Through the use of a particular mode of inquiry this knowledge can be learned, manipulated, and expand- ed upon within the 6 discipline or body of knowledge. Therefore, "academic courses of study" or — curricula , as defined in Webster's New World Dictionary (i960)—designed along disciplinary lines, would be limited to a single set of such components. However, many educators and theorists demonstrate at great length that structuring knowledge along the traditional disciplinary lines is not_ the only valid way to organize ideas, and that, in fact, the traditional disciplines are only one of the many possible ways students can come to grips with complex ideas and modes of inquiry (See "Review of the Literature").

Traditionally, students have been exposed to the five most common disciplines in a disconnected way. They are taught mathematics,

English, history, science, and art or foreign languages so that they can recognize the body of ideas, skills, jargon, and methods necessary to pursue each of these subjects. But rarely are they helped to see any of the ways to integrate or interrelate one or more aspects of these disciplines. These bits and pieces are rarely unified by a common purpose or vision of the world. Attempts to restore coherence,

5w. D. Romey, "Transdisciplinary Problem-Centered Studies, Who is the Integrator?" School Science and Mathematics , vol. 75 (January, 1975) 30-38.

6Ralph W. Tyler, Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971). 8

uch as the survey course or core program, are superficial since they either focus on ideas, problem, or then.es that are unclear or focus on one so broad as to be unmanageable, i.e. Western Civilization. Can such an approach to learning provide enough epistemological amor for dealing with a "world beset with splitting atoms, urban guerillas, psychotherapy, amplified guitars, napalm, computers, as- tronauts and , an atmosphere polluted simultaneously vith auto exhaust and TV commercials?"^ The answer to this question is, for anyone who is a product of the average American high school, not always and obviously, "yes." How have the problems of curricular fragmentation and irrelevance come about and how can they be overcome? What factaul and theoretical evidence can be brought to bear on the assumption that the discipline structure is, indeed, not the only path to knowledge? In order to answer these inquiries and thus open the way to restructuring knowledge, we need to gain some historical perspective of the discipline approach as well as understand the theoretical nature of disciplines." Through such an analysis we can then submit the disciplines to careful scrutiny, thereby clearing a path for their creative redevelopment.

Martin Mayer, an observer of the educational scene, believes men

developed scholastic disciplines in medieval times in order to organ-

ize the events around them and in order to make sense of reality even though these disciplines depart, often radically, from common sense.

Education, he says, is the induction of the learner into these dis-

ciplines , some of which have changed over the centuries quite dramat-

T Fischer, 12. .

ically in terms of their structure and pattern of thought. Mayer at- tributes the origin of the term discipline to academics who created this specialized vocabulary for the purpose of maintaining a narrow focus on knowledge.®

In terms of this country's history prior to the l800's and the public school era, education was private and either church-associated

or carried on in the home by tutors. The most basic ingredients in formal education on the secondary level consisted of some knowledge based on religious thought and the three R’s, followed by training for the youth’s life work. The disciplines of knowledge became more distinct and separate during the industrial era of the 19th century. Disciplines looked inward and became strangers to each other. Spe- cialization had become the pervasive force in accomplishing all important tasks in western societies. ^ The assembly line specialization of industry was duplicated in the public secondary schools, where knowledge was divided into periods in the day and each period was assigned its narrow focus. In the 1950’s and 1960's, schools were expected to meet the increasing needs of technology, and the sciences were stressed to satisfy the fears aroused by Sputnik.

Jerome Bruner, Harvard psychologist, sounded the call for the curriculum movement toward reconceptualizing subject matter around the structure of the disciplines, but, like John Dewey, the major figure in the progressive era of education (l930's), he saw the dangers of

g Martin Mayer, Where, When, and Why, Social Studies in American

Schools (New York: Harper and Row, 1963 ) 1^5«

l+-ll* ^Haas , 10 one group of specialists completely forgetting about the concerns of the other. Biuner's curriculum, "Man: A Course of Study," is an illustration of his attempt to integrate the separate disciplines of 10 the social sciences with other disciplines.

In emphasizing the changing nature of certain areas of thought, Martin Mayer points out that the disciplines of economics and political science began as branches of philosophy and then broke off on their own in the l8th and 19th centuries. And what's more, these two disciplines —and others as well —are not even recognized as disciplines in certain societies. "When the same definitions and categories are carried over to other cultures and other languages, they

typically fail to make contact with reality . . . The disciplines 11 themselves, in short, are highly ethnocentric."

Marc Belth , Professor of Education at Queens College of the City of New York, has dissected at great length the concept of what constitutes a discipline and notes that these structures could change if new points of view or phenomena are presented of which we are not now presently aware. For example, the disciplines of physics, sociology and psychology were inconceivable centuries ago as the modes 12 of thinking which we now recognize as distinctive. The established disciplines were created by those people who made inquiries in those

10 James B. Macdonald, "Curriculum Theory," Journal of Educational

Research , 6 h (January, 1971), 196. Jerome Bruner, Toward a Theory of Instruction (Cambridge, Mass. Harvard University Press, 1975)*

i:L Mayer , 103.

12Marc Belth, Education as a Discipline: A Study of the Role of Models in Thinking (New York: Allyn, 1965) 21. 11 particular time. Each subject, such as sociology and psy- Oology, can be studied as an area of invented, funded meanings, inquiry into which produced Knowledge of the world and its inhabitants as consistent within the context of rules and concepts identified. is, each subject or discipline can be studied as a well-organ- ised and tested body of conclusions which have been «aie by competent students of a field and tested by others. 13 Like Belth , Thomas Kuhn, Professor of the History of Science at nnceton, points out that such special communities did not always exist; they grew out of Europe over the last four-hundred years. In the case of science as a discipline, it was the specialists in the field who established the rules of procedure and the bulk of scientific knowledge. The very existence of the discipline depends upon vesting the power to choose between which problems and solutions to study in the members of this 114 special kind of community. He further places these structures within a man-made perspective by discussing

the disciplines of the sciences:

Having been weaned intellectually on the distinctions among the several disciplines, I could scarcely be more aware of their impact and force. However, for many years I took these distinctions to be about the nature of knowledge and I still suppose that, appro- priately recast , they have something important to tell us . Yet my attempts to apply them to the actual situations in which knowledge is gained, accepted, and assimilated have made them seem extraordinarily problematic. Rather than being elementary logical or methodological distinctions, which would thus be prior

13 Belth, 16.

1 ^ Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 166. 12

aly iS Scientiflc knovledge , they now seem £t ^„r ! °fa traditional s <* of substantive an- sverfers to ththe very questions upon which they have ye been circalarity does not at an invalidate them°em. Buth\ it does make them part of a theory, and by 1 S °- SU JeCtB them to scrutiny to ?? ? regularly applied to theories in other fields. ^-5

Belth agrees that the disciplines and the distinctions among these models for organizing knovledge must always he open to scrutiny, because the elements or criteria which characterize a discipline are the products of men’s minds and as such are subject to change. These disciplines develop not in advance of activity, but in man's [sic] reflection upon acts which continue to be performed in response to pro-

blems before us. They are man's effort to regulate and improve those acts, to account for them, and to explain them through organizing them according to certain models which then supply the laws from which predictions can be deduced. ^ Disciplines are then consciously developed units and therefore we are examining an area in which everything

1 which has ever been said is someone's invention. ^ History, for example —not the actual events and people of the past —is made by historians who connect together the evidence of experience within the context of theories, laws, presuppositions, and systems of explanation.

And an even simpler way of viewing the idea of a discipline is by placing it in the context of a "tool," since it can be thought of as a device for thinking of facts in a way which may be useful for some

15 Kuhn, 9- l6 Belth, 20, 105, 221.

1TBelth, 57. 13

further end. A discipline, like a concept, is a tool since it gives us principles for organizing subject matter. Both are like keys; they open doors. A discipline, however, goes further than a concept since it also imparts a mode of inquiry as well as resultant subject natter, the "what and how" as well as the "why," a set of principles 18 and methods. The mode of inquiry generally consists of two parts:

the formation of a hypothesis or temporary answers to an inquiry, and the process of proof. Kuhn adds it is also the process by which items are added to the knowledge 19 of a field. The content to be learned in a discipline depends upon what research problems scholars in the field pursue most avidly. 20 These acts-the putting of appropriate questions, the search for the appropriate data [using certain methods], and their canon ' cal interpretation—constitute the "discipline" or 21 "knowledge," or "competence" of a field.

With this understanding of a "discipline" and its structure comes

the clear implication that there are as many ways of knowing as there

are differentiated disciplines, and that new structures can produce

new ways of knowing, i.e. those offered by interdisciplinary structures

or "interdisciplines." With this awareness of the impermanent and

theoretical nature of the disciplines, the path is clear for the con-

sideration of new courses which integrate ideas from seemingly diverse

l®Richard S. Peters (ed.) Concept of Education (New York: Humani- ties Press, 1967), 36.

19 Kuhn, 1, 2.

^Joseph J. Schwab, "The Concept of the Structure of a Discipline,"

The Educational Record , vol. 1*3 (July 1962) 199, 203.

21Belth, vii. lU areas in order to analyte and solve problems. If such courses are designed to satisfy the rigorous function of a discipline just described, they will become "interdisciplines," by means of vhich materials of the world are transformed into subject matter and theory bearing the explanations and meanings of human inventions, experiences, and explorations.^^

Interdisciplinary Defined

To accomplish the goal of integrating disciplines, some educators have already designed inter-disciplinary curricula (Chartock, There 1975). are several ways in which curricula could be designed

as interdisciplinary —that is, integrative of several disciplines.

I’ll present only two of the many definitions or designs that are

possible, since two of the meanings pertain more closely to this

study than other meanings. The first definition associated with

interdisciplinary studies —and one which has been largely ignored by educators according to my review of the literature—could involve

a change in the departmental curriculum organization of the school because it means eliminating many or all courses based on a single

discipline and restructuring ideas into "interdisciplines.” Con-

cepts within such courses might enable students to see how certain

ideas are an intrinsic part of all disciplines, though they may take on unique and different meanings within each discipline. For example, an "interdiscipline" might involve students in learning about the role that language plays in each of the traditional subjects or in their

22Belth, 170. .

15 community or the world, or the role of tools, creativity, or morality. It might also involve the discovery of the relationships existing among the different modes of inquiry of several disciplines. For example, although certain aspects of these modes are unique to each discipline, there are similarities which, if the student is assisted in seeing them, can make learning more complete and meaningful to the student. S(he) might find the transition from one subject to the other less difficult. Making such transfers in learning would seem to be a natural objective of most teachers no matter what their

^^cipline . Yet traditionally, this rarely occurs. When it does occur , students often create solutions and alternatives that were not thinkable in more traditional learning environments. By helping students see an idea from the vantage point of the mathematician, the sociologist, or the artist, the teacher is assisting learners in perceiving things in new ways, which can only mean for the student understanding and enlightenment about an incredibly complex and fast-moving 23 world

Interdisciplinary Curriculum with a Problem-orientation Approach: The Holocaust Unit

The second meaning of interdisciplinary curricula is the one most commonly used in ongoing courses, according to my survey of current

2b . art and science journals. This type of curriculum consists of problems or issues which can be more adequately answered or explained by

2 -%runer ( 1975 ) -

2l| Roselle Chart ock, "Survey of Attitudes and Trends in the Field of Interdisciplinary Education," University of Mass., Amherst, Unpub- lished Paper, Spring 1975 . the integration of ideas from different disciplines. Such issues might include crime or pollution or, in the case of the Holocaust unit, problems such as prejudice, economic depression, or war. This type of curriculum incorporates vhat Winthrop calls the -problem- orientation 2 approach." * Such an approach vas used in designing the Holocaust unit. Taking, for example, the problem of the economic depression in Germany after World War I, teachers gathered information from several specialties such as science, economics and psychology to explain causes and effects. A deliberate attempt vas then made by the instructor to show the bearing of these different selections

on the genesis o. ie problem, the various social expressions of the problem, and the selection of an optimal solution for that problem from a set of alternative solutions and analyses. In addition, attention vas focused upon other problems i.e. prejudice and dictator- ship, generated by the one at hand, economic depression. The Holo- caust unit invokes vhat Winthrop calls the "convergence concept" of the term 'problem-orientation." By the convergence concept he refers to the following basic considerations:

1. A problem or phenomenon under study possesses aspects that are customarily dealt with separately by different academic specialties.

2. Information is drawn from these separate specialties that sheds some light on the problem under review.

3. An attempt is then made to show not only the relationship of the segments of information used to one another, but —what is more important —an attempt is made to show

25 'nenry Winthrop, "Interdisciplinary Studies: Variations in Mean ing. Objectives, and Accomplishments," APE Bulletin , 33 (May 1972) 33 17

11 th* "convenes" an selected ™ SSt" "d phenomenon as *" PrOMe“ °r “ *£•?•'** uhich the blems and phenomena generally thought "of'ZT^lTeas nuite Tn~independent of one ann+Vior n , in *hlB step is to show that fourth ve Ire "Lnflly Latfdeallng W1 velope of problems. 26 th an en-

Note that Winthrop's convergence concept not only includes the application of ideas to problems and problem-solving, but to the understanding and explanation of "phenomena" as veil. Some examples from the Holocaust unit can serve to illustrate the four major functions indicated for the convergence approach:

Hitler uses the effects of an economic depression to boost himself to power in Germany in 1933. Along with this depression he coup- les the fiercest racist propaganda and assault on Jews. This leads to scapegoating and murder throughout Europe of Jews and other "infer- ior" groups by those adhering to Hitler's myth of racial superiority and anti-Semitism. This bigotry—on the face of it—would appear to have no relationship to the problems of economic depression or poverty. Yet these events are the very phenomena or problems the Holocaust unit attempts to relate and resolve. Certainly, students are not economists or scholars capable of solving a depression actually or even theoretically. (The economists have not even mastered that art I)

Nevertheless, even though solving the problem is not always possible, some understanding of the complex causes and effects of the problem

^• s possible, and in some cases so are hypothetical solutions, once stu-

^^Winthrop, 3U. 18

dents have researched and analyzed the problem from all perspectives.

The very least that such an orientation can accomplish is to provide a look at a phenomena as it relates to other diverse phenomena. The most the convergence approach can accomplish is an analyses of a problem with the testing of the broadest selection of alternative solutions and the selection of an optimal solution accompanied by a rigorous rationale.

A second example from the Holocaust unit illustrating the functions of the problem-orientation approach is one based on the problem of disobeying the laws of one's country. This is not in and of it-

self a problem, but it became a problem in Germany for many citizens who disagreed with some of Hitler's legal policies, e.g. persecuting the Jews, yet who loved their country and had always followed its laws.

This problem evokes the discussion of ideas ranging from political science (systems of government) to religion, from psychology to science and the use of technology in a police state to control citizens.

Once the students understand all of the diverse ideas which came to bear on the problems associated with disobeying the law, they can begin to resolve these problems for the German citizen—or for anyone else faced with a similar set of circumstances. Unlike the method of the natural sciences, which might lead the student to a closed and prov- able solution, the "testing" of solutions in terms of certain social or political problems cannot be scientific. But just because the solutions are more open-ended does not mean that the student is unable to gather a great amount of evidence and data to support his or her hypothetical solution, proving it to be better than another. With this application of the scientific method—one requiring analyses, data 19

collection, and testing (i.e. comparing and weighing evidence supporting one or another solution )-problem-solving in the classroom can lead to the use of similar techniques by students when they are outside of the classroom and dealing with real problems in their vorld.

One must note that the relating operations in the two examples just given go above and beyond the mere gathering of information from several specialties. The student does not sit back and listen to a few lectures from teachers in separate disciplines about what their area can tell stu-. exits about an economic depression or disobedience

to the law, and then try to extract from these separate lectures (us-

ually prepared with no sense of what another lecturer said) what is significant to the problem at hand. Instead, students see how these two problems interrelate with each other and with other influences.

The relating operations are among the functions of the instructor of

the interdisciplinary course, who assists students in locating appro-

priate data and who plays a coordinating role so that instead of

loose pieces from three or four lecturers , there is a cohesive picture

of the problem.

It is here that we can see why the survey-type of course, which

is what many people mean when they use the term interdisciplinary , is not truly interdisciplinary at all. Information gathered eclectically around a common theme for a survey course or for a book of readings is not information that has been related to the more organic, convergence

sense of the term interdisciplinary . However, the problems in the Holo caust unit allow for this intellectual integration or convergence of . .

ideas from different disciplines to help analyse issues and solve problems

It is important to note here that the label problem-orient.n- tion is more accurate than problem-solving orW.»M„„ because, ln a majority of cases, the problems taken up in such a course will be defined and analyzed as to causes and effects but not solved. Pro- blem-solving cannot always follow analyses because this step is not always practical or realistic. And, in the cases where solutions are proposed, they usually must remain hypothetical in nature. Never- theless, there may be times when a solution can be tested. For example, focus on a community problem such as, "How can the number of traffic accidents be cut down on Elm Street?" may lead students to suggesting that the city place two stop signs on that street. They might actually solve the problem if, after lobbying the city council and showing all the reasons why such signs would cut down the accidents, the coun-

tested their solution by establishing the signs as suggested.

On the other hand, faced with problems of foreign policy or the lack of economic opportunity for Black-Americans , students could bring to bear several multidisciplinary reasons for these problems but not have the means to solve them. They might offer some hypothetical solutions or look at solutions attempted by the government, i.e. civil rights laws and peace treaties and their effects. But for some problems, solutions cannot be tested. Thus the term problem-orientation is more accurate and allows for a look at a greater number of real and potential problems

Martin Mayer observed the looseness with which the term "problem- "

solving" has been applied to the all-encompassing functions of question-answering and issue-explanation. As a result, the term has been diluted and made meaningless. Mayer points out the meaninglessness of the term as it is used in social studies programs today, "i. e . The Boston Curriculum Guide for Geography in Grade IV states, 'To develop a general concept of the United States using the problem approach, e.g. in the song 'America the Beautiful' what is meant by the phrase

'sea to shining sea'? There is no puzzle or 2 ^ problem to solve here I

Similarly projects in , which committees of children report on weaving in the colonies or life in a medieval village do not, of course, involve the kind of problem-solving psychologists mean, though like all human activity they present "problems" to be solved.

Edwin Fenton, Professor of Education at Carnegie-Mellon , clari- fies the meaning of the problems approach, and, like Mayer, he, too, is critical of its application. In theory this approach should enable students to "begin with a question or problem which troubles them and hence has real meaning in their lives. Motivated to learn, they understand better, remember longer, and transfer what they have learned more easily to new situations. If a puzzling situation has no obvious solution, a student must think his way through to an answer."^ But many teachers pose "problems" such as, "Why did Washington cross the Dela- ware?" which is no problem to the student. Fenton believes that if

John Dewey's five steps toward problem-solving were used—not necessar-

2 ^Mayer, lUl.

^^Edwin Fenton, The New Social Studies (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1967 ) 31 . 22

ily in the order given-then problems would be dealt with in an appropriate way and the theory behind the problem approach could be realized:

1) suggestions . In which the possxwe mind leaps forward to a solution; 2 ) an intellectualLation of e difficulty ... felt H (directly experienced) into a e 5 9UeStion for which the sought -°^ answer 3) theth use of one suggestion another « after another as a leading idea, or hypothesis , to initiate and guide observation and othe? operations in collec- tMl "ater al; k) the mental - elaboration of ?he id r S , pposition ( reasoning ? ^ in the sense in whnVw ?nS 1S Part ’ the Wh ° ^ le ’ ° f inf^ence); 5f?estinr?h >, 6 hyP°thesis^ by OVert or imaginative action 29

For Howard Radest of Ramapo College, a "problem" is "any area of experience that threatens, puzzles, or discomforts any person or group of ."30 persons . . Martin Mayer in a more technical way that the term problem should apply to only those situations in the real world capable of verified solution through analysis into solvable puzzles. The facts are known or can be discovered; the results are ac- curately measurable. Rigorous criteria exist for the admission or exclusion of evidence. On the other hand, the social sciences often contain problems with less measurable solutions, as noted earlier, and for this reason Mayer proposes that these kinds of problems be called

"difficulties" since many cannot ever be subject to verified solutions.

In the social sciences there are frequently no demonstrably or certi- fiably "correct" ways of solving the problems or difficulties discussed. Nevertheless, students can be taught the sophisticated puzzle-

29 John Dewey, How We Think (Boston: D. C. Heath and Co., 1910) 106 as quoted in Fenton, 31.

30 Radest in Hook, 232. ;

solving techniques with which to approach the "difficulties." 31 Such techniques and inquiry into "difficulties" are an important part of a problem-oriented course. One may choose to call certain situations "problems" or "difficulties" as far as I am concerned, as long as one recognizes that some problems are not solvable, but are, instead, difficulties which can only be reduced, dealt with or analyzed in all sorts of ways, i.e. it is necessary to recog-

nize that a chess problem is not the same as the unemployment problem.

In summary , the most basic ingredients in the skill of problem- solving as it would be practiced in a convergence-type course involves;

1. helping students clarify and define a problem; 2. deciding what questions to ask about it; 3. formulating hypotheses in answer to these problematic questions deciding what resources to tap to locate needed inform-

ation ; 5. appraising the accuracy of these resources; 6. critically analyzing the evidence gathered; 7- deciding whether the problem has been solved or the goals have been reached, and 8. making decisions or conclusions based on the evidence.

These steps enable the student to "prove" he has "solved" the problem short of going out and actively testing his conclusions. Learners with these abilities possess a scientific approach to problem-solving.

With these skills new fields of knowledge will be open to them. And as the learner matures he will add to these steps, e.g. those of identifying propaganda techniques, distinguishing a proven fact from a theory or opinion, and becoming aware of areas in which it is possible to come to conclusions and those in which it is not.

31Mayer, 1^3-1^^. 2U

W the . Problem-orientat ion g Approach Is the Focub of rhl- Rt,,„ r I am concerned with interdisciplinary curricula that specifically pose problems and concepts which require the integration of ideas from several disciplines in order to he resolved. There are two reasons for my concern with the problem-orientation approach. The first reason can be understood by looking at the nature of the Holocaust material itself.

The unit is actually a study in miniature of universal problems a microcosm of man’s history. If students are to be able to deal vith and recognize the kinds of factors that lead up to such timeless and universal problems as var and inhumanity, then they must be able to grapple with them in the classroom so as to make that first small step toward preventing both of these large—and smaller- -catastrophes in the future, for it must be noted that it is not only the problems of gi- gantic scope such as war and genocide that students are helped to deal with here, but also very real problems in their immediate lives, such as the pressure to conform, to follow the crowd; pressures of school and other stressful conditions; the problems of blind obedience to authority; and prejudice of many kinds. There are few of us who can not relate to at least one of these issues. Students in the Great Bar- rington community have heard or used ethnic slurs against Jews, Poles,

Italians, or the Irish. They are frequently faced with decisions involving the conflict between personal and popular choice. Thus, if students become aware of such issues in different contexts, they may come to know themselves and their world better. Interdisciplinary curricula with a problem-orientation approach have the potential for i

25 accomplishing these goals. The Holocaust material, n particular, provides the opportunity for pursuing such objectives.

In addition, the content of the Holocaust unit is of such a highly emotional and complex nature that my colleagues and I did not think that a mere historical account of the events was satis- factory nor was , the presentation of the historical causes and effects of the Holocaust sufficient for making this material under- standable. We felt that the greatest breadth of knowledge needed to be brought to bear on the questions raised in the unit in order to make sense of this incredible phenomenon. Such irrationalities and perplexing problems could easily leave students feeling frustrated and hopeless unless the material is dealt with in a sensitive manner and in a way that enabled students to see Just how far-reaching were the causes and consequences of such an event. Thus, the nature of the Holocaust unit warranted the use of the convergence or problem-oriented design for interdisciplinary curricula.

A second reason for my interest in the use of the convergence approach has to do with its adaptability; that is, such a unit can be incorporated not only into already existing social science courses, but also into science, literature, or art courses without the need for new sets of books, team teaching, or new courses. This type of curriculum presents to a teacher who is anxious to "interdisciplinize" his or her subject the simplest way to accomplish this goal. A single teacher within a discipline can design a problem-oriented unit with consulta- tion from teachers in other disciplines or by using printed sources

Thus the from other disciplines. S(he) needs little or no retraining. 26

speed and ease with vhich this approach can be implemented is an ad. vantage and could influence teachers to attempt such restructuring of their courses. This idea was further validated by the responses I received from 120 teachers from two high schools on a questionnaire in which they were asked their view of different approaches to integrating disciplines (Chartock, 1975). Only ten percent wanted new courses designed outside of their departments, that is, interdisciplines which centered around transdisciplinary concepts such as language, modes of inquiry, or other ideas. But ninety percent stated that they would be interested in curricula that helped their students see how the problems posed in ongoing courses could be better solved or understood through the integration of ideas from several disciplines. Their response demonstrates the receptivity of teachers in many fields to the problem-orientation approach to interdisciplinary curricula.

Because of the serious questions facing individuals and society today helping , students deal with real problems is one of the most important objectives of educators. The problems of man's inhumanity to man, racial intolerance, or totalitarianism are perhaps not solvable, but can certainly be better understood and thus ameliorated. It is necessary to understand the causes and effects of complex problems in order to create steps toward eliminating the problem though solutions are not always possible. And, more importantly, this approach would stress to students what questions they must ask about an event or idea, questions from philosophical, literary, scientific, or historical perspectives. The ways of inquiry and problem-finding become as impor- .

27 tant as problem-solving when we face complex material such as the Holocaust

How the Four Researc h Questions can Lead to Data about the Effects of the Holocaust Unit on Students ~ "

I have presented some examples of the problems and issues contained in the Holocaust curriculum and have briefly demonstrated how the unit provides for the resolution and under standing of these issues through an integration of ideas from several disciplines. Can students then demonstrate abilities to use and explain ideas from the unit after they have completed their study of the Holocaust? This first research question is intended to measure changes in students' ability to use ideas from different disciplines in solving problems

posed in the unit , as well as to measure changes in their substantive knowledge of the material.

The second research question can lead to information about changes in the students' ability to apply ideas and problem-solving to historical and contemporary issues. This is an important goal of the unit because it is precisely this application of interdisciplinary problem-

solving that students need to know if they are to become the future

problem-solvers and leaders in our complex society . There are two types of contemporary issues which students are expected to analyze using diverse perspectives. The first type is directly related to those posed in the unit and might include problems related to preju-

dice, obedience to the law, or individual responsibility. The second

unit type of contemporary issue is not related to the substance of the

involve the student applying the same itself but would , nevertheless, problem-solving abilities used in explaining ideas from the unit. These problems might be local issues such as the location and construction of a bypass or a nev tovn dump. Students vould be expected to integrate ideas from many areas in order to show their awareness of the diverse perspectives that might come to bear on the eventual solution to these problems.

The third research question is intended to measure changes in students' attitudes. Influencing attitudes is one of the objectives of the unit, particularly students' stereotypical and anti-democratic beliefs. A person's attitude , as defined by Webster's Third Nev International Dictionary (1961), refers to a person's belief or feeling about a person, group, or object, situation or value which could lead to that person acting either negatively or positively toward the group or object. Such highly emotional material as the Holocaust warrants recognition of students' attitudes both before and after exposure to the unit. In this example of the convergence approach to interdisciplinary curricula we consciously directed our concepts and our proposals for the solution of real problems toward a value-laden pole. There is simply no meaning to the request that we solve a social problem but exclude considerations of value and attitude.

If one is to assume that students learn the stereotypical attitudes toward minority groups — including Jews —that prevail in some segments of our society, then such a unit might play an important part in altering such attitudes and helping students rid themselves

32 Winthrop , 3b . ,

Of certain prejudices. Anti-democratic values can also pose problems in a democratic society such as ours which is based on such values as government by the consent of the governed and the rights to free speech, press, and religion, among others. Therefore, it is significant to note whether or not students adhere to democratic attitudes both before and after exposure to the unit. The Holocaust material certainly contains some grotesque examples of what happens under Hitler's closed, totalitarian regime when people were deprived of their basic rights and consent of the governed was totally ignored. Thus changes in students' attitudes in these areas are measured by the use of two scales. Furthering tolerance and democratic values are among the objectives of the unit, and it is my assumption

that knowledge can influence these attitudes. Gordon Allport also

demonstrates how knowledge can, indeed, change attitudes by erasing

-3-3 . ignorance, one of the basic causes of prejudice.

In order to discover the characteristics and methodologies of those teachers who will be implementing the unit, (the concern expressed in my fourth research question), I assumed the role of parti-

cipant observer and visited several classes receiving instruction on the Holocaust. I interviewed each of the four teachers, all of whom are members of the Monument Mountain Social Studies Department. Al- though I do not intend to correlate their behavior with student outcomes on the post-tests, I thought, nevertheless, that it was important to note their methods and what they, as individuals, were bring-

"^Gordon Allport, The Nature of Prejudice (New York: Doubleday 1958 ). 30 mg to the instruction of the material. Such information will have bearing on how the classroom teacher can use material of this nature, what kinds of approaches are possible, and, finally, what kinds of teacher training might be necessary before such units can be successfully presented.

Limitations of the Study

There are three limitations of this study. First, I am the co- author of the Holocaust unit which is in part the object for evaluation and, therefore, I have personal feelings about the material.

Although I acted in the role of researcher and participant observer, this fact of authorship places a limitation on the study.

Secondly, the quality of the control group must be considered.

The population which was selected to act as a control in this experiment was similar to the experimental group in two ways. They lived in an area in which the makeup of the community was the same —in terms of social class and religious affiliation. Also, the students in the control group were chosen on the basis of their similarity in academic standing to that of the experimental group based on social studies achievement test scores and reading scores. However, there were several variables which I did not attempt to control. The only fact that can be stated with certainty is that the control group did not receive the Holocaust treatment. However, I did not control for the possibility that the social studies unit to which they were exposed might have contained concepts related to stereotypical and anti-democratic attitudes or to any of the other concepts which comprise the 31

Holocaust unit. The only variable for vhich a control was established was the Holocaust curriculum. Therefore, the quality of the control group is a limitation of this study.

Finally, I did not attempt to correlate the outcomes, or scores, on the students' post-tests with individual teacher behavior. This type of correlation might have clarified for me what methodologies work, that is, which methods tend to produce desirable outcomes. How- ever, when requesting permission to observe the four teachers involved with instruction of the unit, I was asked by all four to refrain from any cause-effect relationships between outcomes and teaching. Their concern was that publication of any such relationships might cause readers to attribute to them the responsibility for any negative outcomes, i.e. scores which reflected little or no increase in knowledge by the students. As a result, the characteristics and methodologies of the teachers are described but they are not correlated with the results of the evaluation.

Organization of the Study

This study is organized in six chapters, the first of which is meant to introduce the reader to the scope and purpose of the study.

A review of the literature related to interdisciplinary studies follows the Introduction. Chapter III presents in detail the interdisciplinary unit on the Holocaust which is the focus of the study. In this chapter the origin, development, objectives, content, and methods of the unit are described. My methodology or procedures for this study are outlined in Chapter IV and include a discussion of the 32

pilotting of the pre- and post-test instruments , the training of raters, the administration of the instruments and the statistical analyses applied to the resultant data. The results of the study are presented in Chapter V along with tables in which are shown the scores on pre- and post-tests for the group as a whole, for the experimental group alone and the control group. These tables also include frequency distributions for gain scores for both groups. In the concluding Chapter, VI, I discuss the implications of the study and make recommendations for future studies which can lead to more understanding of the content and methodology employed in cur-

ricula with an interdisciplinary problem-orientation.

The underlying concern in this study is with the absence of

interdisciplinary curricula in schools today and with the fact that

those few examples that do exist have not received the kind of care-

ful evaluation that would enable educators to identify the results

or effects on students of such curricula. Without such data, teach-

ers and curriculum planners will find it difficult to create appro-

priate interdisciplinary material, and, thus, such material will

continue to be absent from our educational instituttions . This problem, however, makes my area of research one which is both educa- tionally exciting and worthy of further examination. And it is with this problem in mind that I saw a need to evaluate the interdisciplinary Holocaust material and to pursue answers to the four research questions posed earlier.

The ultimate significance of this study is in its eventual use by teachers and/or administrators in restructuring curricula so that 33 attempts are made to integrate the disciplines. Such attempts should mean that in the future, more students will be able to make relationships between the concepts discussed in school and real issues in the world outside of school. Moreover,, they will be able to better understand and solve a wide range of problems using information from several fields. Once students are equipped with the skills, methods, and ideas common to or related to the several disciplines, they should finally see knowledge as holistic, not isolated in nature. —

CHAPTER II

A REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE RELATED TO

INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES t An evaluative study of an ongoing, original, interdisciplinary unit on the secondary level should be placed within a context of the literature related to such program and to theories of learning, proposals for the restructuring of knowledge, and curricular reform. By reviewing such studies, I see that an evaluative study can be useful and is, in fact, necessary if those interested in and already working with interdisciplinary programs are to achieve their aims. Most of these aims involve breaking down the artificial bar. riers to the wholeness of knowledge that are created by the separate disciplines and integrating knowledge so as to assist students in solving societal problems. That this evaluation of an ongoing program is related to society's needs and to other studies will be supported by the following review of the literature.

Philosophical and Psychological Studies

Several studies create a rationale for alternative structures of knowledge other than those based on the traditional disciplines

found in the departmental structure of today's high school. Most of these studies base their rationales on established learning theories. One such study explores the nature of concepts as a basis for structuring knowledge (Arnone, 1971). Using learning theory to support his views, Arnone analyzes the meaning, development, and functions of concepts. Implied here is the idea that a concept or new way of organizing ideas —could lead to new disciplines as

34 35 well. Arnone shows how concepts mediate the physical and social world, helping to make it less complex, "enabling us to learn more efficiently and affecting our behavior where values are concerned"

(p. 105).

Similarly by means , of an explanation of various types of learning conditions, R. M. Gagne diagrams his theory of eight types of learning, concept learning being one type ( 1965 ). He notes that much learning is based on the number and kinds of relationships the learner can establish. Prolem-solving is the most advanced type of learning, or theoretical class of concepts, and it is just this type of learning which many interdisciplinary studies attempt to achieve.

In his plea to widen the student's perspective within the sphere of methodological and epistemological concerns through philosophy,

Fethe argues for overcoming the obstacles in the way of interdisciplinary programs (1973). He calls on the words of other philosophers, plus his own observations of students from different disciplines, to show how the discipline structure of knowledge is weak and artificial. It is not humanistic studies that he favors since these merely attempt to help students gain knowledge from a variety of areas; instead he argues for a synthesis which emphasizes a concern for the students' appreciating and binding together the seemingly disparate elements of a total intellectual experience. He admits this accomplishment is often difficult but is necessary. One of the most difficult aspects of synthesis is adapting the modes of thought practiced by one field to the frequently quite different modes of easily thought in associated areas. Though this problem may not be 36 overcome, an effort can be made to promote an attitude which would conteract methodological rigidity and force an intelligent consideration of approaches beyond the ’interdiscipline’ which could be useful in relating its special way of thinking to other disciplines." Philip Phenix, a philosopher of education, provides further support for Fethe's belief that one of philosophy’s concerns is with the interfaces of the various fields and its penchant for establishing symbiotic relations (196U). Both philosophers, Phenix and Fethe, show how a discipline is simply one of many possible systems for regulating knowledge.

Phenix writes, "From the principle that the content of the curriculum shall come entirely from the disciplines, it is not to be concluded that the materials of instruction ought necessarily to be organized into separate courses each of which pertains to one of the disciplines. The discipline principle is not an argument for a departmentalized curriculum ..." (196U, p. 319).

Although Phenix ’s stress is on the disciplines, he offers support for the kind of interdisciplinary programs which maintain the rigor and integrity of the disciplines. Such programs are possible, says Phenix, if designers focus on some of the basic relationships that exist among the disciplines and provide opportunities to compare and contrast the different modes of inquiry. He notes that every discipline is somewhat integrative in nature and makes use of materials from other disciplines. Studies can be organized along lines that make it necessary to shift from discipline to discipline provided some reasonable pattern of organization is adopted and any .

reasonable pattern of i j _ ( orcanigamzation7fl + rm is in essence disciplined and thus corresponds to one or more of the six fundamental patterns of meaning that Phenix outlines in his book - (pp. 319 320 ). (See Appendix for these patterns of meaning.) And it is here that Wittgenstein's more plastic theory of defining such learning systems seems appropriate: that is, the essential traits of various disciplines can be Viewed as "family resemblances networks of criss-crossing and over-

lapping characteristics (1958).

In the introduction to his book Education and the Common Good . Phenix is concerned with the content of instruction and asks: "From what common perspective should we consider the content of instruction?" He answers: from the perspective of "the major problems in contemporary culture and civilization . . .[i.e.] the role of in- telligence, the mass media, standards of taste, sex, race, politics and religion [and use of leisure time] ..." (1961, p. h) And because the world is constantly changing and every moment presents new problems, and old solutions seldom apply to fresh situations, he as- serts that "education should be primarily not for accumulating information but For learning to learn and for readiness to meet new demands and make new choices imaginatively" (1961, p. 6).

To accomplish "learning to learn," Phenix believes that it is

. . . imperative that the learner secure a thorough grounding in the ways of inquiry, so that he understands how he should go about testing the truth of what must be acquired at second-hand because of the limitations of time and resources. It is far more important to know well the methods of investigating the truth of alleged

facts than simply to accumulate information . . . In- struction centered about the methods of inquiry, rather

than about its products, is the basis for education . . . (p. 39 ). 38

In a problem-oriented course there is no restriction on the skills of inquiry available to students, and central to this kind of course are learning those skills: e.g. to develop and test hypotheses

(tentative explanations adopted provisionally to explain certain facts and guide the investigation of others); to learn the rules of logic which govern the process. The easy way of instruction by giving answers must be avoided and the emphasis placed instead on the process of investigation and fidelity to evidence.

Joseph J. Schwab also stresses the important competences of questioning and refers to them as the "arts of access” —skills which transcend the disciplines.

These are the arts by which we know what questions to ask of a work—a paper, a book, an oral presentation, a lith- ograph, a sonata, a cinema—and the arts by which we find the answers. Works from the various disciplines require questions about the relations of knowledge and action, theory and practice (1975) PP*

In Schwab's opinion, transmission of the arts of access, of

questioning, problem-stating, data gathering, interpreting, and solv-

ing, requires the services of all the disciplines that constitute a

university, and I would add, a high school community.

Referring to 'arts of inquiry' that give rise to the need for

arts of access, Schwab insists that the "rightness of the questions

to be asked of a fruit of an art or science is not always made

to write a lyric poem ... or under- clear . . . [until] we undertake

study a per- take a small piece of scientific research . . . or to

complexity of these son or community, that we recognize fully the know **7) - There is a need to fields of potential study . . (p.

to ask of a the methods of inquiry before we know what questions .

39 situation or idea. And it is also necessary to learn to identify what are those problems that require attention. Schwab further warns of the possible danger of the arts of access conveying to students the illusion that subjects of inquiry—the disciplines —are the natural segments of the world. "The dangers of such naive faiths in spe- cialisms or in their simple connections are obvious enough to commend to us the desirability of some treatment of the many different ways in which sciences [for example] can be organized or related to one another" (p. 1*7).

In suggesting a dualistic approach, i.e. interdisciplinary studies provided alongside the disciplines, Schwab believes educators can achieve the goals of the "Arts of the Eclectic:" the business of building temporary bridges among the disciplines in the course of applying these disciplines to particular problems. Schwab notes:

Practical problems arise from complex transactions among

men and things , a web of transactions that know nothing of the boundaries that separate economics from sociology or physics from political science. Yet our fullest knowledge of these matters lies in economics, politics, sociology, and physics. To compound this difficulty, each such science readies its subject of inquiry by separat- ing it from the whole of the world and conferring on its part an appearance of wholeness and unity [i.e. as a discipline]. Each of [the disciplines] is couched in its own terms and only a few terms in each set are connected with the terms of another set (p. UT )

To overcome these difficulties and thus better deal with practical problems Schwab argues that what is needed is a way to bridge

per- the gaps among these different areas, while at the same time mitting these areas to maintain their former roles in the curricula

the since the interdisciplinary competence depends, in part, on fruits of the academic disciplines. The disciplines themselves may he useful to the teacher and learner as a source from which to extrapolate usahle problems, but the actions taken to overcome the difficulties must he interdisciplinary since reality is not to be encompassed by the focus of any one discipline. "Teaching which fails to convey the limitations as well as the uses of a single discipline can hinder the formation of the synthesis of ideas and methods of inquiry is the focus of interdisciplinary studies and involves the search for and use of the appropriate puzzle-solving techniques of the disciplines. The structure of knowledge based on the division of ideas into the traditional disciplines is then, at best, a useful, efficient, and sometimes logical way of organizing knowledge; and is, at its worst, an artificial, severly limited way of organizing ideas because it sets up barriers to problem-solving and to helping students see their world as a whole made up of interrelated, often interdependent parts. Although Thomas S. Kuhn, Professor of History of

Science at Princeton, isn't prepared to do away with the tradition-

al structures, he believes that the structure of knowledge into

disciplines and the various distinctions among them, though not valid, lie in the realm of theory and as such must be subjected to the same scrutiny regularly applied to theories in other fields

(19T0). Kuhn further points out that paradigms (models, concepts, or theories) achieved within the realm of an existing discipline could give rise to the organization of a new discipline —perhaps an interdiscipline, for a new theory or paradigm implies a change in the rules governing the prior practice of a discipline. New para- Ul

digm 5 or models can shatter the traditional activities of a discipline by providing new theories, methods and standards. A discipline is itself, therefore, a kind of paradigm or model since it attempts to structure ideas in a way that makes them useful and meaningful. Kuhn implies that paradigms might provide the models or principles around which any activity or body of thought or structuring of knowledge could be organized, and not necessarily structures of knowledge based on one of the traditional disciplines. He explains how science as a discipline is a man-made product and it is the specialists in the field who produce the bulk of scientific knowledge. With this information in mind, it may be that "interdisciplines" could best be structured by those without a strong-vested interest in any one of the disciplines.

John Dewey insists on the need for a creative attitude to prevent a discipline's guiding habits, its rules and skills, from be-

coming ossified (1950). His call for an ongoing and careful look

at the disciplines and his implied support for new structures of knowledge are clear, though the question of how we can achieve these innovations is the real problem. There are no easy solutions but a careful evaluation of attempts at innovation may lead to some answers. Educator Ralph Tyler supports the theory that there needs to be a definite sequence and organization of ideas in order for learning to take place and this organization need not necessarily follow the one set up within the separate disciplines. He implies that there is nothing intrinsically more valuable about students' learning the structure and content of the separate disciplines. Tyler’s criteria for effective organization of learning experiences

include 1) continuity, 2) sequence, and 3) integration. Continuity is defined as insuring the relationships of experiences and curriculum elements over time; sequence emphasizes the importance of having each successive experience build upon the preceding one; and integration involves the horizontal relationship of curriculum or how each subject area relates to the others (1971, p. 84). With these criter-

ia, teachers can go the route of interdisciplinary programs that maintain structure and discipline. For regardless of the curriculum de-

sign, traditional or other, "the problem of achieving continuity is

basically one of putting to effective use knowledge of how learners

mature and the way learning takes ( place" Stratemeyer , 1963).

Furthermore, Tyler’s learning theories lend support to the problem-solving value of interdisciplinary programs and their ability to help students transfer their learning to many different areas.

This transfer ability also helps students retain information learned

(1971). He insists that much information usually remains meaningless to students unless it is used to attack certain problems. Among the

five defects in the learning of information which he identifies is the lack of adequate idea organization which causes students to remember bits and pieces without being able to relate items in an organized way. To help overcome this defect and others, Tyler suggests

dealing with real life problems that the student can relate to. In this way the teacher can present situations in which the intensity of and variety of impressions of the information will increase the like- lihood of remembering these important items and of using them frequent- J*3 ly and in varied contexts. He notes that by using the principles of the psychology of learning ve begin to realize that learnings which are consistent with each other reinforce each other (p. 37).

In his interdisciplinary curriculum, "Man: A Course of Study," psychologist Jerome Bruner argues that such an integrated approach to learning not only enables students to use the modes of inquiry of several disciplines but also helps them see the similarities and differences among the modes (1975)* For example, he shows how the method of investigation used by scientists in experiments shares certain similarities to that used by sociologists, anthropologists, or historians when they formulate hypotheses, develop them, gather evidence, and reach conclusions in spite of the fact that the questions and the

jargon brought to these methods may differ. According to Bruner,

"The children learn the modes in their simplest forms first" (p. 76).

They learn the tools or language of a discipline as the first step to

using its mode of inquiry. His curriculum demonstrates the many and

varied concepts that might be termed interdisciplinary, i.e., tools,

states that a theory of instruction has culture , language. Bruner

certain requirements. It should specify, for example, the most ef-

fective sequence or structure in which to present the materials and

knowledge to be learned, and alternative sequences may be useful for

no single ideal sequence certain students (p. 39) • He argues that

he believes that exists for any group of children" (p. 83) • Also, of concepts— any concept—no matter where it appears on a heirarchy by young chil- can be broken down into its simplest parts and handled more "ready for dren as well as by the older student who is assumed

certain concepts. ill*

In his study of learning effectiveness , Bruner began with the axiom that the object of any learning is not only to master the task before one, but to master it in such a way that one would be saved from subsequent learning of identical or similar tasks. The problem of transfer, then, is a part of what constitutes learning effectiveness. The student who constantly has to "learn all over again" often becomes defensive and develops learning blocks. Much of this transfer of learning of content, method, and skills (many of which transcend the disciplines) could be facilitated by offering students an interdisciplinary program.

As mentioned earlier, inquiry skills, in particular, often transcend the disciplines, but there are other skills vhich also go beyond a single discipline, i.e. general properties of thinking re-

lated to all areas of inquiry such as recalling, comprehending, relating facts, making inferences on the basis of minimal information, interpreting, predicting outcomes, and drawing conclusions. These

ingredeients of thinking are organic parts of all mental operations,

discipline-based or not. Bruner emphasizes above all the cross-dis-

ciplinary skill of being able to identify problems and formulate

questions related to these problems. He believes there is a need to

design exercises in conjecture, in ways of inquiry, in problem-find-

ing (p. 155). It is this process which stimulates and precedes hy-

pothesis formation.

Jean Piaget, the noted psychologist who has posited influential

theories on how children learn, believes that adolescence is the appropriate time to engage students in problem-solving because at that stage of life they are constructing systems and theories that trans- form the world in one way or another. The adolescent eventually comes to an understanding that the proper function of reflection is not to contradict but to predict and interpret experience (1968).

In reference to learning theory, Piaget notes that intellectual acts are not isolated but coordinated affairs; every act of intelli- gence is related to the totality (or whole) of such acts (195I, 1965).

If one applies this idea to learning within the school walls, an argument can be made supporting an integrated organizational structure and not a departmentalized one. He describes how children learn spontaneously and experientially by forming concepts that are logical to them, not necessarily knowing these concepts in the ways they might be formally taught in the classroom. For example, a child's order of development in geometry seems to reverse the order of historical discovery. The child begins with the last of our geometrical discoveries and then builds up to a grasp of the Euclidean system, which was historically the beginning of scientific geometry. This example

psychol- offers , according to Piaget , another look at the kinship between ogical construction of knowledge and the logical construction of scientific knowledge itself. Much of what the child learns in the way of concepts in math spring spontaneously from his own logical operations after much experimentation. And it is findings such as these which appear to lend a base for alternative structures of knowledge other than those provided by the traditional disciplines. His experiments teach us much about human knowledge and the fact that such knowledge must not and cannot always be organized and packaged into

theories open a single structure. Consequently, Piaget's learning s

U6 the way to a rethinking of the organization of curricula.

Dr. Lawrence Kohlberg, psychologist at the Harvard Center for Moral Development and Education, has developed a theory of moral reasoning which potentially can contribute to an analysis of the moral questions contained in interdisciplinary curricula with a problem- orientation (1972). In discussing his cognitive developmental approach to moral reasoning, Kohlberg implies that his goal is to stimulate, not teach, moral development through discussion. Kohlberg' system provides a set of categories for dealing with moral-value questions. He posits that there are six major stages of moral reasoning. As people mature, they move step by step from stage one (in which an individual's decision is made in terms of the punishments or rewards he will receive) to stage two, in which a person bases his decision on the effect it will have on satisfying his own needs and occasionally the needs of others. Everyone starts at stage one early in life but very few people ever move beyond stage four, five, or six. The reasoning of most adults according to Kohlberg, can be classified as primarily stage three or four which maintain that people make choices based on conformity to the will of the group (stage three) or obedience to laws for the sake of social order (stage four).

Stage five involves a person's recognition of the values and principles behind the law such as freedom, equality, and mercy. Aside from what is democratically agreed upon, the right or good is also a matter of personal values and opinion. The highest stage is six, in which right is defined by the decision of personal conscience in ac-

everywhere. cord with general ethical principles that apply to people regardless of the group or nation in which a person lives. These principles are abstract and ethical, e.g. The Golden Rule (Kohlberg, 1972, 1968, pp. 25-30). What should be noted is that each stage does not represent a series of choices but rather these are stages of reasoning to support yes or no choices on almost any question. Although there are criticisms of Kohlberg's work his developmental approach to moral reasoning is worthy of consideration by designers of interdisciplinary curricula with a problem-orientation when they are creating methodologies for implementing such curricula. (See Chapter III for further explanation of how Kohlberg’s work can be applied to the Holo-

caust unit.) I should point out that most of Kohlberg's research on moral judgment is based on the theories of Piaget, whose cognitive developmental approach, outlined in The Moral Judgment of the Child

(1965), has supplied a conceptual framework for the study of moral thought. Piaget's "clinical method" has furnished a widely used technique for assessing moral reasoning. Kohlberg has carried out the most systematic extension of Piaget's theory, developing a major model of the growth of moral reasoning. Both believe that in the area of adopting values, as in all other areas, a growth is going on, i.e. there is a natural development toward maturity.

Practical Studies

Assuming an educator has accepted the value and need for curricular reform along interdisciplinary lines, there remains the question of how such reform can best be achieved. A possible first step is to try to predict all of the obstacles that could interfere with the attempts to change. One study points out a potential obstacle: the cur- 18 riculum reformer's lack of recognition of all of the variables involved in bringing about successful curricular change (Martorella,

19Tl)* By using a systems orientation, an educator can view a problem in terms of multiple, rather than single, variables or factors. This orientation attempts to isolate and solve a problem (such as designing and implementing interdisciplinary programs) as a total entity, rather than a series of unrelated elements." (Perry Rosove, of the System Development Corporation of Santa Monica, California, in Martorella, 1971). W. W. Hermann, also of SDC, presents a hypothetical model representing the operative relationships, constraints, and objectives that might be useful for conceptualizing the dynamics of curricular reform. The author of the article shows how the use of

Hermann's Paradigm might help the reformer or evaluator perceive and analyze all those inter-related variables within the school system that would snuff out reform unless they were controlled.

W. D. Romey criticizes several of the attempts he has observed in curriculum reform, citing several examples of core curricula and unified curricula that fall short of conceptually integrating the content from respective disciplines (1975). Pointing out the difficulty in retraining a discipline-trained Ph.D., he makes suggestions as to how certain problems such as this can be overcome. "New educational environments will have to be organized," he urges.

One study—and there are few more like it —demonstrates how teacher teams, a new way of delivering integrated knowledge, can help overcome some of the obstacles to interdisciplinary programs, ob-

teacher teams stacles that are based on the interpersonal relations of and the stress induced hy demands for role modifications (Smith, Di Bacco, l91k). I„ this study some of the issues and recurring problems in operating Multidisciplinary Training Teams (MOTT) in school settings is recounted, and the principles and procedures for dealing with problems within the MDTT team itself are discussed.

The author's purpose is to show how these problems can be overcome

so that MDTT's may be of use to other training programs planning to establish similar kinds of teams in schools. However, in evaluating these teams, the authors have not used any other tools but their own personal experiences and observations working with MDTT’s in the Nashville -Davidson County Metropolitan Schools and using some of the literature in the areas of social psychology, decision-making, and human relations.

Such teams as those described in the Smith, Di Bacco article

seem to be rare on the secondary school scene, as far as I could de-

termine from my survey of attitudes and trends in the field on inter-

disciplinary education in over 55 current art and science education

journals (Chartock, 1975). On the basis of my study, I came to the

following conclusions: that the art and science teachers in single-

subject disciplines, as well as author-educators on the college level were not presently incorporating within their course content, methods and objectives interdisciplinary curricula; but that the majority of these people desire to restructure present courses and/or create new courses along interdisciplinary lines. Most of these authors of the articles I surveyed defended their viewpoints by referring to the inability of traditional single-subject disciplines to make science and art meaningful to students and relevant to their lives. Most stres-

sed hov vital it vas to give students the tools with which to integrate knowledge in order to attempt solutions to the complex problems of society. Several expressed the view that problem-solving could only be taught through interdisciplinary courses.

A practical concern facing designers of interdisciplinary stud-

ies with a problem-orientation is this question: What are clear and recognizable problems that can serve as the foci for learning? This question has been answered in different ways by educators who advocate the problem-orientation approach. For example, Felix Gross of

Brooklyn College is among those who support the study of contemporary problems because they made education relevant and vital for the

student and supply the challenge and create the interest in theory

and method and in further study. "The misery and poverty and exploit

ation of the environment that accompany war and political domina- tion—these are the problems that make students want to learn. We must begin our instruction here, where their motivation is initial-

ly strongest" ( 1975 , p. 273 ).

Other kinds of contemporary problems might be personal ones

who posed by students themselves or those selected by the teacher ,

considers certain problems as relevant to the needs of youth as they

deal with situations in our modern world. These might include pro-

blems in the local community, especially those that can also be ob-

or, the served in other areas of the country and even universally ;

teacher might select significant historical problems that seem to based on have contemporary relevance. The choice of problems may be or timeless issues such as man’s relationship to his environment 51 man's inhumanity to man, or on what some call "human problems" and Stratemeyer calls "persistent life situations" (1963). They may be selected from Winthrop's CCP's, Continuous Critical Problems, several of which are future-oriented (1972).

Educators who propose that the curriculum be built around personal and social problems and concerns of youth, as well as aspects of living in general, have not agreed upon any one set of problems.

One educator, Harold Alberty ( 1953 ) has called for selecting topics from a wide range of established problem areas which encompass nearly all of those mentioned above. He identifies nineteen of these areas, ranging from "Orientation to School" to "Competing Political,

Social, and Economic Ideologies." The number of these problems and the sequence in which they can be studied should be decided by the staff of a particular school. "Usually the organization for a group depends on the ways in which problems become focal with them and sequence is a matter of starting with learners where they are and taking them as far as the new problem or situation demands."

Any successful reform along these lines should at a minimum be

(Fischer, 1969): "l) founded on a single guiding concept or problem capable of knotting together many strands of study, thus giving them both coherence and visible purpose; 2) capable of equipping students to do something about 'what is going on in the world,' notably the things which bother them most, including war, injustice, racial conflict, and the quality of life."

Finally, teacher education, whether it be pre-service or in-ser-

of vice, is a major factor that must be dealt with if restructuring .

knowledge is to occur. If they are to successfully work with unified curricula, discipline-oriented individuals must be re-oriented. Only through this retraining will education be able to keep up with the needs of society. Strong support for interdisciplinary curricular reform in teacher education programs is reflected in an article by Lindley Stiles, Professor of Education at Northwestern, who stresses that the specialists in teaching in schools of education will soon be discovering that teacher education is an interdisciplinary, university-wide commitment (1973). "For too long we have assumed that a standard subject field major is the best preparation for teaching. For too long we have ignored anthropological, biological, sociological, psychological, political, and economic concepts that teachers need to know in order to work with multi-cultured, multi-ethnic, and multi-purposed groups." Stiles' overall emphasis is on "new frontiers in teacher education, which view education itself as an interdiscipline from which the prospective teacher not only is provided with a broad knowledge base in the content fields being taught, but also with a sound knowledge of education and its processes, and the inter-play of social forces and interdisciplinary content that influence learners

In his discussion of the problem-orientation approach to interdisciplinary curricula, Henry Winthrop also argues for this type of retraining so that there will be more "generalists" in the teaching arena and fewer specialists. He believes that such specialists have a very real role in contributing toward the construction of interdisciplinary course offerings, but that it is the generalist who is 53

better equipped to take on the responsibility for teaching the courses so constructed. This construction is especially necessary, he argues, because most of our contemporary issues are interdisciplinary.

"They are interdisciplinary in the sense that the findings, methods, and occassionally, the values (as in economics) of several of our traditional academic disciplines have a significant, even though partial, contribution to make toward the understanding and resolution of these (contemporary) issues" (1972, p. 29).

Obviously the suggestion that colleges training future teachers equip them with this additional skill is not going to meet the need for the inclusion of problem-oriented interdisciplinary courses in

high school curricula. Therefore, short of revamping teacher-education programs, what steps should be taken to provide training for the

specialist who is subject-oriented, not problem-oriented?

Tyler (1971) notes that before any retraining or innovation takes

place, the faculty must be made aware of the means and ends of the

plan. They must be given the opportunity to voice their opinions and

to participate in the plan. Then those teachers who are interested

in interdisciplinary approaches should be identified by the administration and an given opportunity to either take in-service courses , or to attend summer workshops related to interdisciplinary studies.

Interested teachers need at least minimal training in some of the skills of different disciplines and in translating the language of the materials that they locate from diverse sources. They need to know problem-solving techniques, i.e. locating information, thinking logic- ally and critically, and using the scientific method. Four of the pos- . ,

sibilities for the incorporation of the new curricula are:

1 . Ch reC iVinB training might begin to r!Vrduce inter-disciplinaryr ? intro- units vithin their own department-based courses; ^

2 . master teacher, a generalist, might be trained or hired to coordinate the establishment of required terdisciplinary in- courses outside of the traditional departments (an interdisciplinary studies department); 3. those teachers receiving training might begin to form teams and design courses which would be team-taught either from within or outside of their own departments; h. a group of teachers within the same department might begin to design intradepartmental courses ( Stratemeyer

In other words, in order for interdisciplinary programs and/or cours es to become an integral part of the school, the whole system does not have to undergo radical change. And if the attempt to innovate

is made on a smaller scale at first and then gradually extended to

other areas and grade levels, teacher training, though necessary,

does not have to be a lengthy process.

Whether or not a teacher chooses to consult examples from the

literature of team teaching efforts, there are still two over-riding

and essential ingredients in all of these forms of teacher training that all educators should note: l) that the development of new courses requires that teachers be equipped with the insights, knowledge, skills, and attitudes that will allow them to determine what to teach instead of working according to decisions made for them by existing courses of study; and 2) the teachers involved be able to speak, or at least comprehend, all of the languages of the different disciplines

Hugh Petrie (1976), of the University of Illinois, discusses .

55 this latter point at length and argues that it is the absence of this ability that is responsible for the fruitlessness of so much of the important interdisciplinary work that has been attempted on all levels. Most of these projects never seem to get off the ground, and the "level of scholarship seldom exceeds that of a glorified bull-session. Frequently, and with some justification, people look upon interdisciplinary projects as a dumping ground for the less-than- disciplinary competent" (p. 9).

Petrie offers suggestions regarding the training of the team teachers in hopes that the rate of success for interdisciplinary projects become higher. Such projects, like the humanities and other non-scientific studies, have been accused of lacking rigor and

"discipline," and Petrie implies that this lack of rigor is not an intrinsic problem of the "interdiscipline ," but rather a human problem based on the loose way in which teachers have organized such studies in the past.

Like Winthrop, he makes a distinction between the survey-type course and the truly interdisciplinary effort. In the former, every teacher is simply required to do his or her own thing. The latter, however, requires more or less "integration and even some modification of the disciplinary subcontributions while the inquiry

in is proceeding . . ." (p. 9). Unlike Winthrop, Petrie argues favor of the training of teams as opposed to the training of generalists who would become competent in all of the disciplines. If we

the inter cannot stop short of making Renaissance persons . . . then, disciplinary mode will not be able to contribute to the solution of our pressing societal problems" (p. 10) 56

Whether teams or generalists are trained, both must be concerned with the problems raised by the apparent fact that different discip- lmes use different "observational categories." These teams or generalists need to recognize that these categories not only may mean quite different things by the same key terms, but also that different terms may occasionally mean quite similar things . Petrie suggests that the key pedagogical concept necessary for being able to interpret and understand the language of a wholly different discipline is the concept or tool of metaphor , both the visual and theoretical composites of a discipline, its model or "cognitive map." ’'Meta- phors have traditionally enabled us to gain an insight into a new area by juxtaposing language and concepts familiar in one area with a new area." By cognitive map, Petrie means the "whole paradigmatic and perceptual apparatus used by any given discipline. This includes, but is not limited to, basic concepts, modes of inquiry, problem definition, observational categories, representation techniques, standards of proof, types of explanation, and general ideals of what constitutes a discipline" (p. 11). The major task of any specialist on an interdisciplinary team would be to learn to see at least some of the metaphors and a part of the cognitive map of the other disciplines.

This learning can be particularly exciting when two diverse areas are related. For example, Leonard Bernstein, in a series of lectures, took such linguistic terms as syntax and semantics and showed how they had metaphors in the area of musical notation and theory. Linguistics and music have seemingly different maps yet with such training we begin to see as the linguist and musician "see." Once the participants 57

in interdisciplinary work learn the observational categories and

meanings of key terms of each others’ disciplines, such work has a chance.

Holocaust-related St udies With an Interdisci pi Problero-oripn- TrSLulOn —

There are now several examples of Holocaust curricula in secondary schools throughout America that were created by teachers and curriculum specialists, some of whom had encountered the Holocaust material publishe The Holocaust Years: Society on Trial , which is the focus of my evaluative study. The majority of these curricula emphasize the interdisciplinary nature of the material which the authors of Society on Trial illustrate. "... the unit could be adapted to take on several different emphases because it addresses nearly all of the disciplines. The study of the Holocaust reflects the idea that human knowledge is not compartmentalized; everything relates to everything else. Using the ideas in several fields helped students fit the pieces of the Holocaust question together. And that is one of the teacher’s goals in guiding his or

her students : making whole pictures or concepts out of collections of facts." (See Chapter III)

In discussing the films and books used in her Holocaust curriculum, Margot Strom of the Brookline (Massachusetts) Public Schools points up the necessity of an interdisciplinary approach since there are no simple explanations to the complex problems which make up the

Holocaust (p. 20). For example, when students confront the problem of propaganda and its often dangerous effects, they view "Values and .

Morality in School," a teacher-training film dealing with Lawrence

Kohlberg ' s theory of moral development that includes a segment on a class discussing the role of propaganda in Nazi Germany. Additional insights are gained through lessons using campaign posters of World War II that appear in the book The Art of Persuasion: World War II by Anthony Rhodes

Harold Kessler, a curriculum specialist in the Social Studies

Division of the Philadelphia School District, explained how a committee was formed early in 1976 to develop a Holocaust curriculum guide, which is an eight-unit , 130-page guide entitled The Holocaust:

A Teacher Resource . George French, director of the Division of Soc- cial Studies in Philadelphia, pointed out at the Second Philadelphia

Conference on the Holocaust (February 16-18, 1977) that their unit would not be restricted to the social studies in secondary school, but would be a part of all grade levels from elementary school on up

(Knopp, p. 82).

The National Institute on the Holocaust at Temple University in

Philadelphia publishes a "Holocaust Studies Newsletter," edited by its major founder. Dr. Franklin H. Littell of the Department of Re- ligion. This newsletter provides resources and articles that enable readers to grasp the interdisciplinary aspects of the Holocaust phenomena. In addition to pointing out the Christian roots of anti-Semi- tism and the role of the churches in the Holocaust, Littell has spoken and written often about the "contributions of several professions to the Nazi machine —doctors, lawyers, school teachers, engineers, sol- chemists, theologians and clergymen, policemen, civil servants, ,

dlers and military officers, industrialists bankers, book publishers, radio announcers, advertising, farmers, Journalists (all were complicit! . . .)» (p> 5a) _

On the college level, the treatment of the Holocaust-if there been any at all-has been narrow in orientation. I„ fact, as Dr. Henry Freidlander of Brooklyn College points out, college texts dis- miss Nazism briefly, hardly mentioning the persecution of the dews during World War II ( 19TM . He and his colleagues i„ the History Depart- ment have organized a Holocaust Studies Division in which the approach is interdisciplinary, because, as Professor Friedlander argued at a Conference on the Holocaust in October of 1977 , there are several di- this historical event that have received too little attention.* According to him, the technological aspects, in particular, have been ignored. Teachers of the Holocaust must help students understand the role and thinking of architects and engineers in building the camps, the role of businessmen in selling weapons to Germany and other technological and bureaucratic participation. Friedlander also alluded to the importance of teaching the Holocaust as a moral lesson. In this respect, the curricula not only requires the teachers' grasp of a wide scope of interdisciplinary material and inquiry, but also the teacher's knowledge of how to deal in discussion with moral values and dilemmas. In addition to opening students to more than one line of questioning in relation to an historical event, this material can be used by teach-

^Dr. Henry Friedlander was one of the main speakers at the conference Teaching about Genocide and the Nazi Holocaust” held in October, 1977 at the Sheraton Hotel at LaGuardia, New York and sponsored by the Anti -Defamation League of B'nai B'rith and the National Council for the Social Studies. 60

ers as a vehicle for sensitizing students to values of right and vrong, good and bad, moral issues which confront all of us at one time or another.

Lawrence Kohlberg (1972), mentioned earlier in this chapter, developed a theory of moral development that can be applied to many of the dilemmas faced by people involved directly or indirectly in the Holocaust era; that is, by discussing what decisions certain people should make in solving their dilemma—e.g. Should a German citizen hide a Jew from the Nazis thus risking his own life?—the students can, according to Kohlberg, advance to the level of moral reasoning one stage higher than their own (Galbraith, 1975). Al- though students of today obviously do not face this dilemma, they do face questions concerning obedience to authority and when it is right not_ to obey. This is a timeless and universal dilemma, and

is only one of many contained in these Holocaust-related studies.

Ongoing Programs Described in the Literature: Inter- and Intrade- partmental in Nature

Subjects are usually grouped together into five or six depart-

ments in the average American high school: social studies, science,

English, mathematics, foreign languages and the arts. Within each

department are several disciplines usually thought of as related in

content and mode of inquiry. But there are one of two problems re-

garding these groupings: either the teachers in a department ignore the fact that their department is actually multidisciplinary in nature, e.g. high school social studies teachers who are trained in the

subject of history fail to incorporate sociologocal , anthropological, .

philosophical and other social science perspectives; or, many teachers in a department specialise exclusively in one of the disciplines within their field, restricting themselves to the narrow scope of that discipline, and rarely help students see those inter-relationships that accounted for several subjects being grouped together in the first place, e.g. high school science equals physics, chemistry, biology, and other disciplines which are usually taught separately. Therefore, if students are to begin integrating knowledge, intrade-

partmental offerings are as important as interdepartmental curricular designs

In the traditional social studies department, "history reigns supreme as the curriculum requirement" and occasional electives or 'problems of democracy" courses are subsidiary or irrelevant (Wil- son, 1972). Mayer, a writer on contemporary education, observed social studies departments nationwide in the 1960’s and reported

that for the most part they are still reliant on textbooks which

leave the students of the modern history course with as many unre-

lated bits as the students of several generations ago . . . Now the

bits may have fancy labels and pass as ideas (or "concepts"), but

they still lie useless and inert in the mind until they vanish" (1963).

After several years of observing and teaching on the secondary

level, I can say rather decisively that high school social studies

is still equivalent to "history" and little else. History, as it is

frequently taught on this level does not resemble the integrative,

synoptic discipline Phenix describes as history. I have observed that history teachers are not equipped to assist in the formation of hypotheses about what happened using relevant empirical knowledge from 62

every field, together vith personal understanding and insight. More often , the high school student learns history as a string of dates, facts, and names, vith almost no feeling of the texture of life as pe pie lived it or of the residue of history lying all around. Or they learn history as gospel truths not open to question or interpretations. Instead of inquiry and the inductive approach as the basis of discovery and the social studies, the deductive approach is often used and facts are gathered to support the given "truths" about vhat happened (Mayer, 1963).

Nevertheless, there has, of late, been recognition of the intradepartmental nature of the disciplines within social studies and Eng- lish as evidenced by the responses of thirty-nine Social Studies curriculum developers to a question of vhat direction they think teachers desire materials to take, and in the English curricula designed by James Moffett (1973). Social Education (1975), the magazine of the National Council of the Social Studies, noted that the response of curriculum developers warranted development of multi-disciplinary materials and methods as opposed to the M Nev Social Studies" of the 1960' s, which was oriented toward one discipline. However, even the new social studies, according to Fenton (1967), demanded that the social studies teacher go beyond his history orientation and be trained to understand the structure of all the social science disciplines, either its concepts or its proof process (mode of inquiry), both of which play a central role in the new social studies. Since he sees no way for even a five-year teacher-education program to equip a teacher in all of the disciplines, Fenton suggests team teaching as the way toward integrat- 63 ing the social studies.

James Moffett laments the subdivisions within English departments and deplores the fragmented way in which English is taught with speech, drama, composition, grammar, reading, and literature all taught as separate entities. He prescribes that these subdivisions be organically entwined so that the relationships among them be made clear along with their relationship to other subject fields.

For example, in his new curricula, he presents writing assignments that might well be done in science and social studies classes. Mof- fett explains that he is uncomfortable with the discontinuity between

English and other subjects and hopes that force will be exerted by teachers of English to "break down the compartmentalization of subjects and to ascribe to team-teaching a larger meaning than is generally found in it," e.g. he refers to the "core" program in which

English and social studies are taught side by side but rarely integrated in any real way. In spite of the Fentons in social studies and the Moffetts in English, there is still little evidence of this

"new" curricula. Not only is there a lack of interdisciplinary studies in high schools today, but a scarcity of intradepartmental studies as well (Chartock, 1975). Education seems especially rigid when specialization reaches the point where barriers among subjects in the same department become so high as to mask the intrinsic relationships of grouped disciplines. Even in schools which offer several

social science electives, teachers rarely make an attempt to inte-

as grate the ideas of these subjects around any central focus such problems or related aspects among their methodologies. When a school system does finally attempt to break do™ some of the barriers that exist among basically-related knowledge, its first step is frequently the intradepartmental approach, or an interdisciplinary offering within a particular department. Interestingly, the problem-orientation design is the most common form of intradepartmental and interdisciplinary approach being implemented in high schools today.

One example of an intradepartmental curriculunhas been described by Thomas Gadsden and his colleagues (1975) at the B. K. Yonge Labor- atory School of the University of Florida. A Correlated Science Pro- gram (CSP) was designed for Grades 10, 11, and 12 because of the con cerns about the inadequacies of the discipline-centered courses then being taught. Students were not able to see the interrelationships

that exist in the environment and among disciplines and between science and society. Six concepts were identified that enabled the science disciplines to be transcended and a multi -textbook approach was instituted. The authors reported that the student response to correlated science was seen in the rise in course enrollments from 22# to

65 #.

An example of science and math integration is described by E. Lomon and others (1975) who developed a program known as USMES (Uni- fied Science and Math Educational Strategy) at the Educational De- velopment Center in Newton, Massachusetts. USMES brings together all the natural science subdisciplines and math curricula through the real problem-solving approach. Teacher teams arranged their instruction to look at a given problem from the standpoint of various disciplines. 65

Going even further than these two examples is a course which integrated several disciplines but was offered within a physical science urse. R. B. Bloom ( 19T3 ) structured his course so that it attacked the problems of relevance, and he dealt with such cross-disciplinary problems as the origin of life, evolution, drug use and abuse, and pollution. He had the students read biolgraphical sketches of Darwin,

Copernicus, and Freud as well as Inherit the Wind, a play based on the Scopes trial, which involved controversy between the teaching of the

Biblical interpretation of the origin of man and the teaching of the scientific or evolutionary theory of man’s beginnings. Bloom made analogies between science and art through the study of problems faced by

scientists, composers, artists, and natural philosophers , (e.g. Ein-

stein’s relativity an analogy of the relativity of the Cubists, Braque, and Picasso). Using this approach, he achieved a synthesis of the cognitive and the emotional discussed earlier in the section defining the

convergence-concept of the problem-oriented course.

A similar interdisciplinary course offered in conjunction by the

social studies and science departments at Monument Mountain Regional

High School in Great Barrington, Massachusetts, ;i.s entitled ’’Man and

His Environment." This course, an elective, combines no less than six

disciplines in the exploration of problems. For example, taking the

problem of how best to scale a mountain—Monument Mountain, in this

case — students tap physical education skills in preparing to actually

climb the mountain. The physical education teacher along with the biology teacher discuss muscular coordination, which muscles will probably hurt, and why, and the actual techniques used by professional "

climbers. The social studies teacher of psychology questions students about their possible fear of heights. Together the class discovers the origins of these fears and ways to cope with them. Poetry by William Cullen Bryant is used to retell some of the history, and mystery, of this mountain. Following the climb, students write compositions, essays and poems, about their venture. Others develop the pictures they took, some of which illustrate the food preparation and packing done before the climb. In addition to viewing a documentary about mountain- climbing, students listen to nature-related music. And, finally, the science teachers with expertise in botany and geology help students identify the kinds of vegetation and rocks on Monument Mountain, how they came to be there, and what might become of them in the future.

But such cross-disciplinary approaches with emphasis on personal and social implications are still largely untried in our schools or given only token treatment in secondary school science departments.

In spite of examples of innovation, the natural sciences, social sciences, and other discipline clusters are still largely transmitting items of information and techniques which have no meaning to the students (Raman, 1972). There is an inward view of science and of social studies and language arts by the specialists in these fields and present courses seem to place children in the position of pure historian or pure scientist, oblivious to the applications of their work (Layton,

1972). R. D. Cohen (1972), of the University of Wisconsin, observes that as one moves from K-12, the "walls between traditional disciplines in the clusters of the natural sciences [especially] grow higher and higher. 67

Similarly, art educators pointed out in several of the current journal articles that their discipline too remained isolated and irrelevant to the majority of students. Just as the science educators stressed a need for presenting problems from a scientist's frame of reference, art educators, too, pointed up the need to present problems from an artist's frame of reference in light of the serious

problems facing our society today.

Rudolph Arnheim (1969) has written about the value of taking art out of its isolation within the schools and synthesizing art and science since both share common goals: They are both ways of helping man understand himself and his world. He attempts to re-establish the unity of art and science, i.e. of perception and thought, of feeling and

reasoning. DaVinci merged the two worlds, he notes, and states that.

The lack of visual training in the sciences and technology on the one

hand, and the artist's neglect of the beautiful and vital task of mak-

ing the world of facts visible to the inquiring mind strikes me as

a . . . serious ailment of our civilization ..." Since we think by what we see, Arnheim calls for art educators, in particular, to recognize that visual thinking calls more broadly for the ability to see visual shapes as images of the pattern of forces that underlie our

existence—the functioning of minds, of bodies, or machines, the structure of societies, or ideas.

E. L. Collins (l 97l)» an art consultant to public schools, stated that, "Art educators have been guilty of presenting fragmented, isolated, and trivial information and activities." He calls for more opportunities for the learner to become socially conscious and aware of 68

hov to cope with the needs of their changing world. In their respective articles , F. Graeme Chalmers ( 1971,), a Fine ^ Department Mp_ ector, and R. E. Halvorsen (1971). art educator, loth expressed the views of the majority of artist-authors surveyed. Halvorsen sees a need for art programs to deal with such problems as pollution, poverty, and waste in our society. "It is incumbent that we in art education become active participants in program planning for our modern technological world and for man's concern for survival." According to Chalmers, "Art may . . . create awareness of social issues and lead to social change." He adds that the arts can teach about society since they may "express and reflect religious, political, economic, technological, leisure, and play aspects of culture."

Mason (1972) describes how boys in one school, for example, decided to explore the problem of designing toys for toddlers and how they gave themselves sophisticated problems of observing the development of muscular coordination involved in manipulating toys (and consequently very tough problems of design) as well as finding it necessary to look carefully into the meaning of play for the children. Such

work is useful and positive and is genuinely interdisciplinary. In

such a project each boy may specialize in one aspect of the inquiry but each sees the whole of everything that happens along the way to

completion.

Offering interdisciplinary courses with a problem-orientation with-

in traditional department structures is the step most favored by science and art educators, according to a survey of sixty journals (Chartock,

1975 )- A majority of them favored change within their respective disciplines rather than a move towards establish,establishing an interdisciplinary studies department. Most suggested broadening the objectives of

«ell as enriching, than more radical innovations. Their cautious approach indicates that even attempts to fuse subjects within a single department is a rather large undertaking, one that might be to institute in light of the conservative positions of the teachers m the secondary science, art, and other departments. Perhaps their desire for less radical restructuring reflected the fear of these educators that their disciplines would lose their basic characteristics and value if taken out of its departmental context. Nevertheless, they did not feel that broadening their course objectives to include the application of skills and knowledge to societal needs and problems would endanger iheir discipline. In fact, many implied that an interdisciplinary problem-orientation would enhance their discipline's value since "we've no place to go tut up!"

Finally, this survey of journals revealed that most teachers of art and science are not presently incorporating either intra- or inter,

disciplinary approaches within the content, methods, and objectives of their courses. Yet most of them stressed how vital it was to give students the tools with which to integrate knowledge in order to better solve the complex problems of society. In summary, they all echoed— to a greater or lesser extent—the feelings of P. D. Hurd, from the School of Education of the University of California:

Subjects can no longer be taught as valued for themselves independent of the rest of society . . . The natural, social, political, and behavioral sciences need to be 70

brought into a relationship and presented . . . for the welfare of man. This will require that we take a more 1X8t VleW ° f the entire school 5? f? curriculum. The problems that concern man most—disease , malnutrition, pollution, urban living, longevity, social disintegration ineqauiity, and others—are not those that can be solved within the limits of isolated disciplines. The fragmented knowledge of discrete disciplines is too limited for interpreting human experience . . . (1972)

Thus we see that problem-centered interdisciplinary curricula can help students realize the full potential of knowledge taught in the disciplines; and the location of such curricula may be equally effective when offered within the departmental structures of today's

high schools or within newly established structures.

This review of the literature has dealt with some of the opin-

ions, conclusions, and theories of several philosophers, educators,

and psychologists concerning topics that are relevant to the struc-

turing of interdisciplinary programs in general and such programs

related to the Holocaust in particular. Their ideas involve theories

of learning, the restructuring of knowledge, and curricular reform.

The preceding research findings clarify a basis for the further exam-

ination of interdisciplinary curricula in order to measure the ef-

fectiveness in transmitting the kinds of skills and knowledge speci-

fied as goals of interdisciplinary programs. Further, these findings, as well as personal experiences, provide a rationale for interdisciplinary programs. An evaluative study of the program dealing with the

Holocaust could be a step toward the implementation of many more such units on the secondary level in the future.

Bruner's pedagogical attitude toward change serves to emphasize the objective of my evaluative study: "What is needed is the daring and freshness of hypotheses that do not take for granted as true what has Merely become habitual" (1975). Such couraEe can help educators recognize what they do not understand and permit them a „ev and unbiased look at alternative theories regarding statures of knowledge along interdisciplinary lines. CHAPTER III

DESCRIPTION OF AN INTERDISCIPLINARY UNIT ON THE HOLOCAUST: SOCIETY ON TRIAL

Or igin, Development, Objectives , Concepts, and Methods

Prior to 1973 there was no organized published curricula for secondary students that focused specifically on the Holocaust. There was no unit complete with defined objectives, learning activities, set of readings and resources, and evaluative measures. Why had such an historical catastrophe like the Holocaust been left out of high school curricula?

Four reasons for this neglect have been commonly offered by teach-

ers, parents, and n the public at large. Some insisted that, The hor-

ror of it can’t be faced or discussed. We are too close to the event."

This reason may have some validity if one looks at how long it took

Americans to face —and teach about —America's enslavement of blacks and

slaughter of Indians in the nineteenth century. The civil rights move-

ment did not gain its real momentum until the 1960's and the first

major film with an Indian point of view didn't appear on the market

until the early 1970 's ( Little Big Man ).

There is a second reason often given for excluding the Holocaust

from the curricula: "The young should not have to learn about such things. It's too awful. What happened occurred in the past and is best forgotten." This comment becomes meaningless as we remember that young people watched murders in Vietnam of innocent thousands on night- ly television from 1968 to 1972 and many wanted to know "why?" Many 72 73 became alienated, turned off, and confused when they found their

classroom off limits for an analysis and confrontation of the controversial aspects of the bloody Vietnam spectacle. In one high school m Des Moines Iowa , some , students wore black armbands in mourning for the war dead, and the administration attempted to force them to re- move these symbols of protest. Freedom of speech, however, prevailed when the Supreme Court ruled that the students' freedom of speech must be protected. In this event, and in the controversy about teaching the Holocaust because of its horror, it is difficult to defend not teaching it in light of philosopher George Santayana's words: "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it." We have the responsi— bility of educating for the sake of preventing other catastrophes.

Some suggest a third reason for the absence of discussion of the

Holocaust in classrooms. "The survivors couldn't talk about it yet.

They wanted to tell us. Some did, but many could not express themselves or talk about it so soon." Since 1975 no less than one-hundred books have been published by or about survivors, most noteworthy among

them Terence DePres ' The Survivor . Elie Wiesel, himself a survivor of the concentration camps, has written several books related to his past.

Night , in particular*, is for many the most vivid and powerful of the survivor's stories. The Diary of Anne Frank was for many years the only document by a victim of the Holocaust and it remains one of the most widely read. Further, many Germans were reluctant to discuss the subject and, in some cases, are still anxious to relegate the Holocaust to unspoken history. However, writers like Daniel Lang have visited

Germany. Lang interviewed several Germans in 1977 and found out some . —

71*

Of the feelings, doubts, and concern8 Qf & Qf ^ ^ lation regarding the events that took piece, in sene cases, i„ their own back yards ( Lang , 1977 )

still others, like members of the German-American community, give urth reason for not dealing with the Holocaust. They ask, "Won't teaching about it make people hate Germans and others vho may have helped the Nazis?" On evaluation forms given to students in one school at the completion of their learning about the Holocaust, most students indicated that they had come to realize that they, too, might have done what some Germans did under similar conditions; they indicated their

awareness that we are all not so different from those who oppressed and those who were oppressed. Any curriculum dealing with the Holocaust should, of course, try to rid students of the stereotypes they have of any group, be it Jews, Germans, Poles, Arabs, or Italians. Such a curriculum must reveal that some Germans actively collaborated with the

Nazis; some were silent out of fear and for other reasons; and some risk ed and often lost—their lives trying to hide Jews or to help them escape. Teachers, therefore, must not be pressured into suppressing the facts about a gruesome historical event so that those responsible

for crimes appear flawless.

It is difficult to know if these are the only reasons for the un-

deniable fact that history textbooks traditionally have given the Holo-

caust no more than one line or paragraph (Friedlander , 1975). It is

difficult to know why texts give more space to battles and dates than they do to the overwhelming fact that one third of the world's Jews and three-fourths of European Jewry—were obliterated simply because .

they were Jews; and that millions more died because they either resisted Hitler, were "racially impure," or were political and military enemies

Whatever the reasons may have been for educators, writers and the public ignoring this major historic event, the fact remains that now, in the 1970's, throughout the United States, there is a profound concern among religious and secular groups that knowledge of this event he structured and disseminated within their schools. Dozens of colleges and school systems either teach courses about the Holocaust or incorporate units within established courses, such as American and World History, Literature, Philosophy, Psychology, and still others.

The proliferation of books on the market has made the topic accessible

to all readers as did the four—night telecast of a "docu—drama” by

Gerald Green entitled "The Holocaust" (shown on April 16-20, 1978,

NBC).

Much of the initial discussion about the Holocaust took place at

educators' conferences in the early 1970's, sponsored by secular and

non-secular groups. For example, the National Conference of Christians

and Jews organized seminars and workshops on the subject; the Anti-De-

famation League (ADL) of B'nai B'rith, which for many years distributed to schools films and materials related to the Holocaust, also sponsored meetings. The National Council for the Social Studies included work-

shops on teaching the Holocaust at three of its regional meetings and the Council co-sponsored conferences with ADL and the National Confer- ence as well.

Nearly every Jewish agency in the United States played a role in 76

distributing information and guides related to the television presentation on "The Holocaust," and the debate and controversy about the quality of the presentation allowed for continuous newspaper cov- erage of the topic via "Letters to the Editor" in the New York Times for many weeks after the program.

Dr. Franklin H. Littell, professor in the Religion Department at Temple University in Philadelphia, was one of the first who spoke out about the need for a study of the Holocaust in high schools and colleges. He was particularly concerned with revealing the Christian roots of anti-Semitism. His efforts in bringing the topic forward

for close scrutiny led to his establishing, in 1975, the National In- stitute on the Holocaust based in the Religion Department at Temple, as well as to the creation of a Graduate Program in Holocaust Studies in which a student can earn a Ph.D. The National Institute has held conferences each year since 1976 on some aspect of the Holocaust and transcripts of these conferences are available to the public. It

was at a conference held in November, 1975, that Dr. Littell and his

associates, along with the Jewish Community Relations Council and the

Public Committee for the Humanities in Pennsylvania, discussed the

responsibilities of educators in making the Holocaust a part of the

curricula. As a result of this meeting and several subsequent ses-

sions, the Philadelphia Board of Education, along with staff and as-

sistance from professors at Temple University, wrote and published

The Holocaust: A Teacher Resource . This guide and the Holocaust curricula is now used in the Philadelphia Public Schools.

Teachers in the Brookline (Massachusetts) Public Schools also developed a cu^leulu* about the Holocaust soon after attending a Holocaust Conference at Bentley Colle6 e In Waltha*. Massachusetts in 19T6 at which two Of the Great Barrln^on teachers, ayeeXf Included, spoke about the steps they took in developing their interdisciplinary -it. The Brookline effort is entitled "Facing History and Ourselves: The Holocaust and H an m Behavior" and was written by Margot Stern Stro, and William Parsons.

But among the very first designers of interdisciplinary Holocaust curricula for secondary students were the teachers in the Social Stu- dies Department at Monument Mountain Regional High School i n Great Barrington, Massachusetts, whose program, written in 1973, is entitled ggciet^on Trial: A ^tud^_of the N . aziJIolocaust * The origin and development of this unit is described below and throughout this manuscript along with the teaching methodology. Society on Trial has been a nine-to-twelve week unit within the ninth-grade social studies course entitled History I since 1973 at Monument Mountain.

It was, in part, because there did not appear to be any unified curriculum available which dealt with the Holocaust that Jack Spencer, then Social Studies Department Chairman at Monument Mountain, decided to seek a grant with which to develop such a unit. Spencer and his department, which included six other teachers, agreed that the Holo- caust was perhaps one of the most important events in history that must be taught. But they found that texts gave the Holocaust no more than one line or paragraph. At the very most, students knew that the Nazis

*Now that the unit has been published, the title is The Holocaust Years: Society on Trial , Roselle Chartock and Jack Spencer, eds. (New York: Bantam, 1978 ). 78

mUrdered 8iX milli °n • children, - There were books and related films available on the subject, but nothing comprehensive, no tool to assist teachers in the high school classroom. At Monument Mountain, students in the ninth grade had traditionally learned about Nasi Germany from a pamphlet published by the Ameri- can Education Publications, but reference to the Holocaust was brief and other aspects of world history received far more attention. There- fore, Spencer wrote a proposal in the Fall of 1 972> for developlng a lengthy unit on the Holocaust. The National Conference of Christians and Jews accepted this proposal in the Spring of 1973 , and granted the department $2,135 to develop materials. The outcome of the summer of 1973 was perhaps the first twelve-week unit of high school instruction on the Holocaust ever devised in the United States. After members of the department compiled a book of primary and secondary source readings extracted from nearly one-hundred books, Spencer and I created a Teach-

er's Guide . Of particular interest is that the high school in Great Barrington in which the unit was created has a student population of eight hundred, twenty or less of whom are Jewish. The community itself, of approximately ten thousand, is mostly Christian and thus the topic of the Holocaust is even less familiar to them than it might be in areas predominantly Jewish. Many of the students’ perceptions of Jews had a been stereotyped one. ’’Pushy, stingy, loud, rich, and just different from Christians’’ were among the most common. By the end of the unit, eighty percent of the students, on an informal evaluation, denied that Jews were very different from Christians in any real way.

It was with the idea of getting the materials disseminated through- 79

out high schools in America that the creators of the unit approached the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B’rith in the Fall of 1971,, asking them to publish the curriculum. With ADL's assistance and support, the unit underwent several revisions and in the Fall of 1978 the reader was published by Bantam Books in conjunction vith ADL. The title ^became The Holocaust Years: Society on Trial.

The Teacher ' s Guide remains unpublished, but continues to be used at Monument Mountain. It begins with an introduction that prepares the teacher emotionally and intellectually by setting forth a ration- ale_ and an outline of topics for those coming to the unit with little or no background on the subject. This is followed by an outline of objectives for students and teachers. A day-by-day syllabus provides an approximate time allotment for each chapter, and questions and activities related to each of the topics. The syllabus can be geared by the teacher to the particular requirements of the course being taught since the material is inherently interdisciplinary. Also included are lists of concepts and a glossary of terms. There is a table of contents of all the excerpts contained in the students' text of readings , an annotated bibliography of books for student reading along with an extensive bibliography of teacher and student resources organized according to major focus; and, finally, there is a list of audio-visual mater-

ials . A section is also included which describes one-week to three-week approaches to the unit which might be adapted within psychology or literature courses, politics, religion, or other subject areas in which a teacher might have a maximum of three weeks in which to teach some of the material within the context of their disciplines. 1

The initial structure of the chapters evolved when the department began asking the basic questions of: "What? To whom? By whom? Where? When? and Why?" The outline of chapters follows and is in the form of a topical outline. A table of contents listing the actual readings and sources used under each of the topics appears after the topical outline. This listing of sources has been taken from the "contents" pages in the Bantam publication of The Holocaust Years: Society

on Trial . ***************

Topical Outline of the Ideas Taken up in the Unit: "Society on Trial: A Study of the Holocaust"

Topic # : What happened during the Holocaust?

A. Extermination of the Jews 1. dehumanization in concentration camps a. man vs. "machine": the technology of extermination b. man vs. machine in contemporary society

c . man vs . man 2. The "Final Solution of the Jewish Question" 3. Geographical distribution of camps h. Problems encountered by Jews before and during the Holocaust according to accounts of survivors, historians, and psychologists

B. The Nature of Man 1. Philosophies of Man’s Nature 2. Scientific Research

Topic #2 : Victims and Victimizers

A. The Jews of Europe before World War II B. On Problems of Anti-Semitism, prejudice and scapegoating the psychology of Naziism C. On Resistance and Obedience 8l

Topic #3 : How and Why? The Third Reich

A. The German People Talk about Their Problems 1. Economic depression and its effects 2. War losses—World War I 3. Treaty of Versailles U. Weimar Republic's weakness 5. The Jew as historical villain: Christian theology 6. The Nazi lure: Hitler Youth; conformity vs. in- dividuality

B. Naziism and Hitler's Philosophy 1. Totalitarianism 2. Aryan super-race: Lebensborn Movement, euthanasia and the corruption of science 3. Militarism and nationalism h. Propaganda and indoctrination 5. Naziism as religion 6. Nazi leaders speak

Topic ffh: What does the Holocaust reveal about the individual and society?

A. Further Inquiry into Human Nature 1. humanity vs. inhumanity 2. nature of aggressiveness 3. behavior under stress: submission or resistance; decency vs. indecency a. Music out of pain: "Peat Bog Soldiers," "Ani Ma'amin" b. Children's prose and poetry c. Organized and individual attempts to resist d. Loss of faith and the opposite

B. On Individual Responsibility 1. The Role of the German intelligentsia (doctors, scientists, architects, artists, etc.) 2. 38 witnesses: Queens slaying of Kitty Genovese 3. collaboration by non-Nazis with Nazis

4 . The World was Silent 5. The Danish Resistance

Topic #5 : Aftermath

A. Problems of the Displaced Persons B. The Nuremberg Trials and Sentences Imposed C. Israeli statehood D. Germany and the World Today 1. Problems of guilt vs. ignorance in Germany 2. The hunt for Nazi war criminals 3. Neo-Nazi movements 1*. Holocaust education 82

Topic f/G: Co-old it1. Happen Again?

A. Analogies in Literature and Life Psychological, Technological and Political used Methods to Bring about a Controlled Society a. Brave New World . A. Huxley "b* I9&4 , Animal Farm , G. Orwell c - Fahrenheit 451 . Ray Bradbury d. Current Problems: censorship, life in test tubes , euthanasia, social conditioning, invasion of privacy e. The Slaughter of the Armenians, The American Indian, the Burundi Tribe in Africa

B. Ominous Signs 1. Current events and problems: a. Israel and the Arabs b. India and Africa c. the Soviet Union and Soviet Jewry d. neo-Nazi movements in U. S. e. obedience to authority: Stanley Milgram experiment

The following sources are the actual readings which are included under each of the topics just listed. These sources are included on the

"Contents" pages in the publication, The Holocaust Years: Society on Trial .

Contents

I . WHAT HAPPENED?

The Extermination of the Jews

1. Auschwitz: A Concentration Camp 5. The "Final Solution" in Action -Bernd Naumann -Testimony 6. The Graebe Memorandum 2. The Death House -Testimony -William Shirer 7. Dehumanization and Starvation -Viktor E. Frankl 3. The Horrors of Daily Life 8. Map of Major Concentration -Bernd Naumann Camps

4. "The Final Solution of the 9. Chronology of Laws and Actions Jewish Question" Directed Against Jews in Nazi -Lucy Dawidowicz Germany 1933-45 83

10. We Escaped from Hitler's 23. What Should I Do? Germany -William Goodykoontz -Catherine Noren 2h. Hey, White Girl! 11. "Listen to Me!" -Susan Gregory -Elie Wiesel 25. The Meaning of Scapegoat 12. Extermination of the -Gordon Allport Gypsies -Helen 7 ?in 26. Prejudice -Gordon Allport 13. Estimates of Jewish Losses 28.

1939-^5 27 . The Jew as 15. Scapegoat -Gordon Allport The Nature of Man On Resistance lh. The Prince 29. -Niccolo Machiavelli On Resistance -Abraham Foxman 18. Man Is Evil and Warlike 30. -Thomas Hobbes III. HOW AND WHY?

16. Man Is Rational The Third Reich -John Locke The Third Reich in Perspec- 17. Man Is Innately Aggressive tive -Robert Ardrey -Gertrude Noar

Man Is a Product of His Seven Case Studies Environment -Edwin Fenton and -B. F. Skinner John Goode

II. VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZERS 31. Herr Damm Milton Mayer The Jews of Europe 32. Why I Joined the Hitler Youth 19. Christians and Jews In -William Allen Europe 1870-191^ -Uriel Tal 33. A Town Goes Nazi -William Allen 20. Jewish Life in Europe Be- tween the Two World Wars In Their Own Words -Judah Pilch 34. Rudolf Hoess, Commander of Prejudice and Scapegoating Auschwitz

Why He Killed 21. The Greenies 35. Hoess Explains -William Goodykoontz the Jews

22. What Is the Difference Be- 36. Other Gestapo Men Explain tween a Prejudice and a Misconception? 37. Albert Speer Speaks -William Goodykoontz .

Hitler's Theories Twentieth Century Man 38. On the Aryan 52. Man as Aggressor 39. About the Jew —Anthony Storr

i+0. 53. People Are Really The Jews in Hitler’s Mental Good World at Heart -Anne -Lucy Dawidowicz Frank 54. The The Nazi Program Decent and the Indecent -Viktor Frankl ^1. The Nazi Program Behavior Under Stress ^2. The Lebensborn Movement 55. Music Out of Pain —Richard Grunberger Peat Bog Soldiers Ani 43. Euthanasia Ma’amin Jewish Partisan Song -Richard Grunberger 56. Children's Writings IV. WHAT DOES THE HOLOCAUST RE- We Got Used VEAL ABOUT THE to. . INDIVIDUAL I AND SOCIETY? 8. ljike to Go Alone It All Depends on How You Look at It M • A Doctor for the Nazis Re- Homesick members The Butterfly -Dr. Miklos Nyiszli The Garden

45. From a Doctor's Diary 57. The Behavior of the Victims -Hans Hermann Kremer 58. The Warsaw Ghetto bG. Kim, Cabin Boy and Seaman -Kim Malthe-Bruun 59* Resistance in the Concentra- tion Camps 47. Bernhard Lichtenberg, -Abraham Foxman Prelate 60. Why So Little Resistance? 48. The World Was Silent -Elie Wiesel -Judah Pilch 61. Were Hitler's Henchmen Mad? 49. The Righteous Danes -Molly Harrower -Abraham Foxman V. AFTERMATH 50. A Negro Congressman Speaks for Minority Rights 62. The Uprooted -Arthur W. Mitchell -Richard Mayne

51. Thirty-Eight Witnesses 63. Kibbutz Buchenwald -Martin Gansberg -Commentary 85

6U. On the Genocide Convention 79. Instructions -New to All Perons Catholic Encyclo- of Japanese pedia Ancestry 80. Kiyoshi Hirabayashi 65. The Nuremberg v. Trials United States Leo Kahn -Supreme Court Decision 66. The Sentences Imposed by 81. The Greatest Trauma of All Military Tribunal -Charles Silberman

67 . State of Israel Proclama- Ominous Signs tion of Independence 82. Voyages of the Damned 68. Dachau: Munich Suburb -The New York Times 69. A Visit to Auschwitz 83. Obedience to Authority -William Helmreich -Stanley Milgram

VI. COULD IT HAPPEN AGAIN? 81+ . Visa Is Sweet Sorrow to a Soviet Couple Parallels in Literature -David K. Shipler and Life 85. Germans and Jews Today 70. Utopia: The Controlled -Craig R. Whitney Society -Aldous Huxley 86. India Limits Civil Rights -William Borders 71. The All-Powerful State -George Orwell 87. The Occurrence is Past; The Phenomenom Remains 72. Babi Yar -Raul Hilberg -Yevgeny Yevtushenko 88. Ominous Signs and Unspeak- 73. If We Must Die able Thoughts -Claude McKay -Elie Wiesel

7l+. Why There Has Never Been Glossary of Terms a Humane Society -Arthur Koestler Index

75* On Blind Faith -Eric Hoffer

76. Sold to Louisiana -Jacob Stroyer

77- Slaughter of the Innocents -Newsweek

78. The Armenians: An Example of Genocide -Helen Fein 86

Sections of the Teacher's Guide

In the original guide for teachers, the following sections appear: Teacher Objectives, Student Objectives, Approaches and Activ ities, and Evaluation Techniques.

I. Teacher Object ives

Teachers involved in this instructional unit should:

A e e t0 (b°°kS SklllS ' °^ ’ > ldeas) and °Pen atmosphere In°uM w " 01 0 Peri° a °f the Hol°caust and interpretations^ lts

B. Assist students in probing the complexities of man's behavior under various conditions of stress.

C. Organize the materials and concepts dealing with the Holo- caust so that students can apply the concepts to their own lives and time as well as to other historical time periods. D. Provide students with the tools of decision-making through presentation of several perspectives relating to the Holo- caust period.

E. Help students develop skills in communicating their ideas and understanding of concepts; skills such as writing, discussion in small groups; developing hypotheses and projects of their own choice through research and questioning; reaching conclusions.

F. Measure the change in students' attitudes and comprehension through the use of evaluative techniques.

G. Read at least six books concerning the Holocaust period for background and preparation.

II. Behavioral Objectives: Students

Students will be able to:

A. explore, discuss, and interpret the following concepts through written, oral, and artistic presentations:

1. Man's inhumanity to man a. prejudice ^

1. anti-Semitism 2. scapegoating 3. genocide—the Holocaust

3.' authOTi Stress ans ^ tarianism >eo >:ies ’ **• attitudes and Individual's responsibility f r actions s possibility to ™ other i: £ nations ana and "usk^af: ZZly^ ^ B ' t0° theses^ 1S ° f f°“ing hypo- based on 8 ’ reachlng conclusions given materials and data;

c. seek ideas ^rom a wide vsyn o+v trying to derstand and explain

D. lelS etWeen the forces and ^ events that gave rise ?oZ?Z C S lar f° rCeS inn the eVents that existed past and existe" t todayi”s in different parts of the world; E. 3 tf:rmS deallng uith man^natOTe^ the Holocaust period and

F. complete essays and papers that will measure students' of the material grasp as well as attitudinal changes;

G. pursue this study on their own through additional readings and questioning.

Approaches an d Activities

A. The following approaches will be implemented throughout the unit: use of:

1. audio-visual resources a. pictorial and artistic displays b. films and filmstrips with records c. slides d. music e. video-tape lecture 2. discussion— small and large groups 3- readings a. non-fiction 1. primary sources such as documents, personal accounts, speeches, diaries 2. secondary sources b. fiction

1 . novels

2 . plays 88

C ‘ Society on Trial, the book of readings compiled by members of the Social Studies Department that will be the major text required for the students; and includes excerpts from noted books on the subject. There are also several books on re- serve; a book list; and pamphlets

U. artistic as well as scholarly material created by students and presented orally

5 • guest speakers when available.

The follow: are additional activities teachers may find useful: stub o may:

1. read literature of their own choice in addition to the required readings dealing with the Holocaust 2. make drawings expressing their reactions to the subject matter 3- see or read a play dealing with some aspect of the unit; perhaps organize and present a scene U. write a play dealing with some aspect of the unit 5. watch and analyze current and past TV programs and movies dealing with World War II, the Holocaust, and the Nazis 6. role-playing where students act out situations which they are familiar with that will enable them to better grasp concepts dealing with man’s nature and inhumanity; also situations where students are placed in historical roles (Jews in Germany, Nazi soldier) for pur- 10. poses of problem-solving. These spontaneous enactments can also lead to lines for a play

7 . write a story from the viewpoint or frame of reference of someone involved in some aspect of the time period under study 8. write to the Jewish Museum in New York City inquiring about displays that might relate to the unit; possibly visit the museum 9. interview people who lived at the time either in Ger-

many or other countries ; former prisoners who survived concentration camp; or historians familiar with the time period write poetry or songs expressing reactions to the unit.

The guide contains further activities and specific questions to

accompany each of the readings and films.

IV. Evaluation of Students

Students are expected to complete all required readings and written assignments, view all films and regularly attend classes. In con- order to evaluate students ' ability to interpret significant 89

cepts and analyze the numberous Quests* * Of this study the *** S ° much a part , following evaluative t.^h ? tuted and should be qUeS "in ^ lnStl ’ completed by all students!

2. quizzes reSp0nsee i,d“e!S’(SK teacher j. several assigned essays ^ . two papers 5. define terms on list given at beginning of the unit =: - 6ellngS rFand P° lnts of view; and to raise questions ItTt is suggested that students write down eir questions and personal reactions day by day in preparation for these sessions. Again, this is optjon- 1, teachers may wish to make this a requirement. C^ ' an^eS *“ C° >< nC attitudinal°responses ~

V. Evaluation by Teachers

Teachers lm ed in the unit will meet weekly to discuss any questions or problems they may be having concerning the unit or lculties the students are encountering. These sessions will present opportunities to share ideas and techniques that they C * S fUlly 0r successfully—used; to discuss any changes that shouldT \be mader in the direction of the course and to note in wri n an suggestions ^- 6 y that will be useful in expanding and improving the present syllabus.

Introduction to the Text *

The introduction that I wrote for the Bantam publication of the reader appears on the following pages and provides both a rationale and an emotional set for the layman and the teacher about to embark on the awesome responsibility of teaching a subject which defies rational explanation.

^Reprinted with permission from Bantam Books, publishers of The

Holocaust Years: Society on Trial , 1978, Roselle Chartock and Jack Spencer, editors. —

In tro duction

If we are to learn from history how to improve the quality of human life, then we must examine both the positive and negative chapters in human history. The readings in this anthology have been excerpted from over 100 primary (first-hand) and secondary sources so that the reader can begin to learn about the Nazi Holocaust, an example cf a negative chapter that remains unparalleled. Genocide and racial persecution have always been a part of the past, but never before the Holocaust has such persecution been practiced on so large a scale or with such calculated cruelty. The term Holocaust” is formally defined as ‘‘the complete destruction of people and animals by fire” and has come to refer specifically to that destruction which was perpetrated on the Jews of Europe during World War II.

‘How could the Holocaust have happened?” is the question immediately asked by someone who has just confronted the facts of this grotesque picture of man’s inhumanity to man. There are no easy answers to the question of why six million Jews and six million non- Jews were systematically slaughtered in Nazi Germany and elsewhere under the leadership of Adolf Hitler. Nor are there simple answers to the other complex questions raised by this historical phenomena which defies comprehension, questions such as: Who were the dead? Why were they killed? Had they tried to escape? Who were the murderers and their accomplices? How could they? What makes some people resist and others obey authority? What would I have done undue similar circumstances? Could such a thing happen here—or anywhere again?. And there are the broader question What can such a catastrophe tell it about human nature? Are there comparable examples of man’s inhumanity? What is the role and responsibility of the individual in society? Where does one draw the line between obeying the law or obeying one’s conscience? a

The readings in this anthology have been selected v/ith these and other disturbing questions in mind. More and more students, and the general public as well, now want to know why country after country sat silently by as millions of innocents 'were murdered. They are asking why this chapter in history was left out of their history* books with r.ot even one line of reference. As teachers introducing Holocaust material in classrooms, we have seen students—some for the first time—become seriously interested in reading, research, discussion, and problem-solving, when confronted with ideas that touch their very lives and the lives of everyone in their community. For example, haven’t we all had to deal at some time or other with the issues of tolerance and intolerance, obedience and resistance to authority, conformity and individualism, freedom and the repression of freedom, and, of course, good and evil on several levels, both within our family roles and in our roles as citizens of a free country and citizens Of the world? In addition, we are constantly facing questions of morality—of what is the right thing to do or the “good” thing to do in a given situation. Our moral dilemmas obviously don’t deal with whether or not to disobey the law by hiding a Jew from the Nazis— question many Germans faced. Instead, we may have to decide if we’ll refuse to pay taxes which we know are going to finance a war we can’t morally support, or if we’ll speak out against our country’s contributions to a totalitarian government, or if we’ll do business with a known racist in our community. We may not have to decide whether to obey an authority figure as pervasive as Hitler, but don’t all of us have to deal with authority figures? As students, we are often in conflict with parents and teachers. As employees, we must decide how to react to the orders of employers, local officials, even doctors and others whose services we depend on. Tims a study of the Holocaust goes beyond the specific events of the time period, 1933-1945, by relating these events to the universal and timeless issues of society. By tackling both the unique and universal aspects of the Holo- caust, the reader can grapple with a very microcosm of history. In seeking resolution to the difficult, often un- answerable, dilemmas raised here, it becomes necessary for the concerned student and citizen to bring to bear on these inquiries as much information ns possible from such diverse fields of knowledge as philosophy, literature and poetry', religion, psychology', government, geography, and science. The readings herein arc taken from every one of these fields, thus enabling one to sec how differing issues actually interrelate; how, for example, an economic depression relates to the generating of fear, prejudice, and eventually violence. By linking these excerpt together there evolves a cohesive - found-. «£« ,,ow “»« «» Hoioi

pCOp' e wi " ask Eater'S reading this 'S.v!' n hC r‘ ° a"!*y° Isn’t i/besMo sSp ^r^phati^^S^^tSt'S•his'p” ttofhiSo ( "f

recognize the signals of when it might happen again. It is only through an exploration of both the positive and negative chapters in world history that we can ever expect to learn from the past. What lessons will be gleaned from these selections will depend both on what the reader rings to tins anthology, and the desire of the reader to discover the truth about himself and his world. There is however, one idea all will readily grasp from a study of this subject: that the courage and morality of a society are constantly on trial, and in crises society is often tested to its limits. One student, after being asked if events surrounding the Watergate burglary could ever lead Jo something of Holocaust proportion, answered: Could be. Maybe it wouldn’t be the Jews again* maybe it would; but if what went on in Auschwitz could happen m a civilized country in 1944, v/hy couldn’t it happen in any civilized country at any time—even 1978 if people are really blinded by their own problems and hate? . Teaching the Holocnant.

This unit presents students with a synthesis of much that is important in the social studies, the sciences, and the hunanities. ents get a look at history, the impact of technology on politics, human behavior, and the many ways in which man responds to bizzare circumstances-the facts of the Holocaust. Students become interested in reading and asking questions; they watch and discuss meaningful films. There are experiences throughout the unit for them to use different kinds of source material; and they have frequent opportunities for writing down their ideas and feelings based on this material. Prom the facts of an historical event, the Holocaust, students are led to generalize and explore the broader concepts of prejudice and the nature of man, the meaning of individual responsibility and the relationship of contemporary issues to history.

And, finally, the methods used in presenting and teaching the unit offer a model for instruction of other interdisciplinary units. The way in which the material was introduced, using a film to stimulate interest, lor example, might be used successfully at the outset of other curricular units. (An extensive discussion of methodology

can be found in the Appendix.)

Moral Education and the Holocaust Unit

The work of Dr. Lawrence Kohlberg, referred to in Chapter II,

can be useful in the instruction of a problem—oriented interdisciplinary curricula, particularly the Holocaust curriculum. This unit raises a multitude of moral questions and/or dilemmas which arise out of different situations. Many of the issues raised parallel the concerns usually raised in specific disciplines, e.g. poverty, var, political tyranny-the social sciences; euthanasia, breeding human life in a controlled environment, the technology of killing- the natural sciences; propagandists art, music, or literature— the humanities. Moral dilemmas are actually the central core of

this curricula. There is no part of the material which does not evoke our strongest emotions or which does not tap our intellect as we demand to know the answers to the questions of "Why did this happen? Who are the victims and the victimizers and their values? Could such a thing happen again? What are the moral, social, economic and other conditions in a society that could give rise to

such a holocaust?" Thus a moral reasoning process becomes a nec-

essity in dealing with this material. Applying moral reasoning

can help students bridge the gaps between the disciplines that are tapped in the unit since students must, among other things, identi-

fy the values of people in different roles, e.g. scientist, writer, teacher, politician, factory worker, artist.

Below are samples of moral questions contained in the Holocaust unit. These questions are indicative of the emotion-filled content of this material. They need to be handled sensitively and skill- fully so that students respond to them in a questioning and knowledgeable manner.

A. Moral questions related to individual vs. collective responsibility :

1. If you remain silent in the face of injustice and tyranny are

you, too, in some way responsible for that injustice? (i.e. Ger- 95

extermination policies?

b. Should a ship full of fleeing Jews be alloved to enter an American harbor?

c. Was Hitler a good leader?

d. Evaluate totalitarianism and democracy. Be situation-

specific as well as general.

2. Economics:

a. Were the causes for World War II "good" in terms of

specific objectives of the initiators and participants?

b. Is it right for a country to try to win back territory

lost as part of a treaty settlement?

c. Was the Treaty of Versailles fair to victors, losers

following World War I?

3. Science and Medicine:

a. To what extent should scientists continue to do research

in controversial areas such as cloning and creating hu-

man life in test tubes?

b. Should euthanasia become legal and to what extent should

it be applied?

c. What, if any, should be the legal limits on abortion?

d. Should doctors be allowed to use animals and humans in

medical experiments and what should the guidelines be?

e. How can technology be helpful, harmful, abused?

U. Art, Music, Literature:

a. To what extent should an artist, musician, or writer dif-

ferentiate between what is art, craft, propaganda, or 96

-an citizens and the vonld who remained silent although aware of* the death camps.)

2. If all of your friends Joined the Hitler youth group-whose values you disagreed with— should you Join?

3. If you are an engineer for the railroad which is transport- ing Jews to camps are you responsible for their deaths in the same way as the soldiers who rounded them up? k * Are there ever times when being "a true believer" (Hoffer) is right?

5. If I obey the orders of an authority figure am I then not guilty of the act I was ordered to do?^

6. When is it right to follow my conscience and not the law? B. Moral questions that find their origin in the traditional discip-

lines but require an integration of ideas for analysis and under-

standing :

1* Political Science:

a. Was the decision by the American president and others

to reduce the immigration quota of European Jews right

in light of their knowledge of Hitler's persecution and

Stanley Milgram's study Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View (Harper and Row, 197M * presents the results of an experiment at Yale in which subjects were told by the psychologist-experimenter to inflict more and more severe shocks to a group of "victims." The majority continued to do so—to obey—in spite of the anguished cries of the victims. Only a small minority achieved, in Kohlberg's terms, stage six moral reasoning (independent thinking) and refused to inflict the shocks. For this minority human dignity and life were the promin- ent values over and above obedience to authority. .

amusement?

b. Should artists try to affect public opinion in relation to social, political and other problems?

c. Were the artists and musicians vho painted and vrote music to further Nazi ideals responsible for some of the consequences of Naziism?

d. What values are inherent in the German myths about Seig- fried ; in the music of Wagner?

These are only a few of the endless number of questions from which moral dilemmas could be designed and used in the classroom. What follows is an actual example of the application of Kohlberg's

theory to a dilemma from the Holocaust. It is a dilemma similar to one faced by the central character in Hans Peter Richter's book Friedrich whic; , equired reading for students taking the unit

Society on Trial .

35Dilemmas usually involve stories or situations that present a central character with a choice. The dilemmas are moral because students must think about the rightness and wrongness of various actions that the characters in the dilemma may take. The dilemma above appears in the Audio-Visual Kit which accompanies the second edition of Th e Shaping of Western Society , a course in the Holt Social Studies Curriculum. Each one-semester course in the series contains six moral dilemmas developed at the Social Studies Curriculum Center at Car- negie-Mellon * University ( 197 0 . These materials have been tested jointly in U8 high school classes by this Center and the Laboratory of Human Development at Harvard. This research is designed to gather the results of the application of Kohlberg's theories of moral development to the CMU Social Studies Curriculum. Similar materials in the form of filmstrips and records have been published and distributed by Guidance Associates, a subsidiary of Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich

(Pleasantville , New York). The Center for Moral Development at Har- vard in conjunction with the Brookline, Massachusetts Public Schools have created and issued curricula which also applies Kohlberg’s theories Helga 's Dilemma

Helga and Rachel had grovn up , together. They were best friends despite the fact that Helga' s family Christian and was Rachel’s was Jewish. For many yea™ religious difference this didn't seem to matter^uch in’oe^ ltle SeiZed °Wer P ’ the 8ituation changed. Hitler requirede ired Jewsj to+ wear armbands with the Star of °n ^ hem * He begaa to encourage his - + J followers to P perty of Jewish ^° Pe°Ple and to beat them on the 17street. Finally, he began to arrest Jews and deport them. Rumors went around the city that many Jews were being killed. Hiding Jews for whom the Gestapo (Hitler's secret police) was looking was a serious crime and violated a law of the German government. One night Helga heard a knock at the door. When she opened it, she found Rachel on the step huddled in a dark coat Quickly • Rachel stepped inside. She had been to a meeting, she said, and when she returned home, she had found Gestapo members all around her house. Her parents and brothers had already been taken away. Knowing her fate if the Gestapo caught her, Rachel ran to her old friend's house. Now what should Helga do? If she turned Rachel away, the Gestapo would eventually find her. Helga knew that most of the Jews who were sent away had been killed, and she didn't want her best friend to share that fate. But hiding the Jews broke the law. Helga would risk her own security and that of her family if she tried to hide Rachel. But she had a tiny room behind the chimney on the third floor where Rachel might be safe.

Question: Should Helga hide Rachel?

This kind of question—posed following the presentation of a dilemma—p vides the initial focus for a discussion because it enc. .rages students to offer yes or no opinions that may be supported by a variety of reasons at all six stages of Kohlberg's scale. These reasons become the primary focus of a discussion, and the discussion becomes the major vehicle for moral development. The teachers' probing questions should enable students with differing views to clarify and justify their points of view by offering an analysis of their reasons.

The Carnegie-Mellon University group state that a good moral dilemma should have these characteristics:

1. it should present a real conflict for the central character 2. it should generate differences of opinion 99

3. si deration ^ lBauaa for <=°"- ^i'e^as ITt* °i dUemma: °bHga- tion to one's friend Ld ^r^ 7 * COncern ity and law, f°r author- * and belief in< ^ life. 36 the sanctity of human

This group also identifier* j. . & teaching leading a good discussion Process for of a moral^r?m°ral dilemma: students Teachers must help

2 . 3.

of the best reasons for recommending and 8 a snecifiepecific actionarfio comparing and +v, contrastingcontraq+intr these reasons of other 04- 5 7 with those udents. The value o , . judgment made dent is by7 the stu~ based on specificP ° criteriacrite^iT » evidence, al data en* o-f and factu- eVery°ne i- the class is ex- Pposedsed to rathe evidenceT the student is using to justify U< th St'ldent makeS hlS J u4»"ent subject Pub"' ^rif- t- ^o USt ’WVe " WS the u esrone poss?bie, Ld h. r f lr reaS0"ln® and that others ^he di scuss?o„!^ during

The authors of the materials and strategies just discussed designed them in light of Kohlberg's findings and do not question the validity of those findings, i.e. they state, "Because of Kohlberg's research, we know that individuals develop their thinking about moral

issues in a definite sequence ," 38 . . However, there is research which question these theories (Kurtines and Greif, 197^; Levine, 1976). But m spite of some flaws in Kohlberg’s theory, his basi premise is of value: that controversy and conflict, which is part of any problem-

^Ronald E. Galbraith and Thomas M. Jones, "Teaching Strategies for Moral Dilemmas, An Application of Kohlberg’s Theory of Moral Develop- ment to the Social Studies Classroom," Social Education, vol. 39 , no. 1 (January, 1975), pp. 16-22.

-^Galbraith, p. 19 .

3®Galbraith, p. 22 . 100

oriented curricula, is to be accommodated or resolved by reasoned reflection-cognitive and moral and by conversation rather than force or coercion. Cognitive moral growth is moral reasoning based on acquired knowledge. The moral reasoning process applied to interdisciplinary problems and issues can help students develop individual decision-making skills and demonstrate the need for individuals to assume responsibility for the decisions they make. These are particularly important experiences for students who live in an age where they are constantly bombarded by conflicting value systems. They may see one set of standards and values in the home, another in school, and, possibly, both of these violated through the mass media or among

their peers . Through the study of the Holocaust—and other curricula with a problem-orientation—the student can begin to confront con- value systems and evaluate which are appropriate for him in

certain situations.

Moral decision—making should increase in schools as teachers

themselves become more knowledgeable about the process and more open

about their own operational stages. The comfort of "morality as a

private matter" is illusory. Comfortable Germans helped make Hitler possible. There must be a public as well as a private conscience.

Teachers can no longer avoid "harsh social realities" and controversy in the classroom. 39

39 Robert V. Duffey, "Moral Education and the Study of Current

Events," Social Education , vol. 39 » no. 1 (January, 1975) » p. 35. : :

101

Holocaust Un i t

The methodology involved in the teeching of the Holocaust-end the student response just described-can be useful to educators interested in adapting such material to their own courses as veil as adapting some of the same methods to courses dealing with cross-disciplinary concepts unrelated to the Holocaust. In an attempt to further expand on the interdisciplinary nature of the Holocaust material and its possible use in helping teachers to create other convergence-

type units, a list of themes is presented below which constitute the sources for the problems taken up in The Holocaust Years: Society on Trial. This list will make clear the kinds of issues contained in the curriculum-issues which are better understood through the convergence of information and, in some cases, procedures of analysis drawn from areas such as literature, several social science disciplines, science, and the arts.

Themes and issues wherein lie the hypothetical and real problems dealt with in the unit

1. Man’s humanity vs. inhumanity 2. Tolerance vs. intolerance 3. Resistance vs. obedience to authority Individual responsibility vs. collective responsibility (and guilt) 5. Totalitarianism vs. democracy 6. Good vs. Evil —man's nature 7. Nationalism vs. universalism 8. Pacifism vs. militarism 9- Ignorance vs. knowledge 10. Contemporary social problems created by the impact of science,

technology , and invention in Western society 11. The dimensions of value in a complex social and technological milieu, and some of the relationships of the governmental sciences to these dimensions of value. .

102 A somewhat sharper focus can he brought to hear upon the actual expression of the conver 8e„ce-type approach to inberdfscipUnavy endeavor if the reader refers hack to the outline or synopsis of some of the more specific cross-disciplinary concepts covered in the Holo- caust curriculum (See "Topical outline" on p.80). Essentially this particular course of the convergence-type is one that is devoted to 1 ) an examination of the undesirable aspects of man's relationship with his fellow man and the negative external and internal forces that influence his actions, and 2) an examination of the spectrum of proposals for improving man's relationship with his fellow man by shedding light on the responses of man to inner and external forces (i.e. persecution, poverty, propaganda, and other forces)

Following is an illustration of hov the convergence concept can be applied to one of the problems analyzed in the Holocaust unit: that of dehumanization, past and present.* This problem, in particular, can be handled better vithin literature and the social sciences along with films, because l) the theme or problem of dehumanization allows one to shuttle back and forth between the film, the novel and nonfic- tion, the former presenting the feel of the conditions of dehumanization, the second the actual conditions; 2) the novel and film provide the powerful emotional impact, or measure of the feelings for the reader that the factual content and theories of the social sciences cannot;

*The format used in this final section of Chapter III is based on one used by Henry Winthrop in his article, 1972. 103

3) the emotional impact of the novel or film may prompt the reader to want to learn something of the genesis of dehumanization, the forms of its expression, the conditions that maintain it, and some

of the contemporary proposals for eliminating or reducing it; U) the reader who has made the transition from the novel or film to some familiarity with the sociological, psychological, economic, cultural, and technological conditions of dehumanization is likely to become quite knowledgeable about the problem of dehumanization. Similarly, music, expressing the feelings of those who endured the dehumanization of concentration camp life during the Holocaust can have an impact on

the learner who can discover feelings from both the words of the inmates and their melodies, most of which are in a minor, droning key.

Dehumanization is considered by many to be a serious problem of the twentieth century, precisely because man is being challenged by his own powerful and often deadly technological creations, i.e. the machinery of mass communication and industry used for negative purposes or which result in harm to the environment and man himself; nuclear weapons, and so on; also the examples of man's inhumanity to man as seen in acts of torture, war, crimes, the crowded conditions of city living, and the propagandizing effects of the mass media.

Thus such a problem lends itself rather well, as I have already said, to study by the convergence approach. Dehumanization has also been an increasingly central theme in twentieth century literature. By using both fiction and non-fiction as sources, the teacher can help bring out the relationship of prevalent social values both to the forms of dehumanization in our time and to the solutions currently being proposed to dissipate some of these forms. 104

SOME

FORMS

SOURCES

THE

DEALING

PROBLEM

WITH

THESE

FORMS

DEHUMANIZATION

AND

(HOLOCAUST-RELATED

SOME

NOVELS,

MATERIAL

FILMS,

AND

PARALLELS)

NON-FICTION 105 io6

In the preceding chart, four forms of dehumanization are set forth with some novels, films and non-fiction sources that express

or deal with these forms in whole or in part. By extended reading

of non-fiction materials, both popular material (i. e . McGinniss* Selling of the President, 1968 ). and work done by specialists (i.e. Bettleheim or Fromm), the teacher puts himself in a position to deal with any particular form of dehumanization through the convergence approach which lends itself to the actual classroom treatment of the interdisciplinary relationships between literature and the social sciences. The concerns of these two areas plus the concerns of film can be facilitated by course offerings of this type. If one extrapolates to other kinds of problems which are dealt with

in the novel, it should be clear that illumination and enrichment

through interdisciplinary analysis are possible for many of the

problems and issues facing American society and the individual.

The Holocaust unit, known as Society on Trial , has been pre-

sented here as an example of an interdisciplinary unit with a problem-orientation. The convergence of ideas from several disciplines was required in order that each theme within the unit receive adequate treatment and analysis. Through this intensive look at the origins and methodology of the Holocaust curriculum, I hope that other teachers can apply these organizational and instructional ideas to their own attempts to develop interdisciplinary materials. .

CHAPTER IV

PROCEDURES

This study is designed to explore four questions related to inter- diseiplinary curricula. The purpose is to identic the effects of implementing a particular unit of such a curriculum. The four research questions are:

1 * students learning as a result of exposure to interdisciplinary material?

2. Can students apply interdisciplinary concepts and problem- solving to historical and contemporary issues?

3. What changes in attitude result?

h. What teaching methodologies are employed?

The unit on the Holocaust, which is a component of an established ninth-grade Social Studies Program, was the vehicle used for the purposes of this investigation.

Subjects

The experimental group consisted of l6^t ninth—grade students in eight classes of approximately twenty students each who took a course called History I for their freshman social studies requirement at Mon- ument Mountain Regional High School. It is within this course that the Holocaust unit (the treatment) was taught simultaneously by four

teachers during the seven weeks between the students ' February vacation and April vacation (February 2h to April ih) Of the 16^ students involved in the course, about one-fifth are above average in ability according to reading test scores, and are tracked into what are known as Level 1 classes; four-fifths are average and slightly below

10 ? 108

average acceding to scores on social studles ^ ^

(L6Vel 3 ClSSSeS are made “P ° f average ^ student* but these students are not taught the Holocaust unit. The decision to omit these students vas based on the fact that their reading scores indicated they would have difficulty with several of the Holocaust readings. However, their exclusion fro, the course is at present a topic of discussion within the Social Studies Department and there is a possibility that Level 3 students will be included in the future.) The control group consisted of 78 similarly ranked ninth-graders in four classes in a nearby high school who did not receive exposure to the Holocaust material or any other unit termed by their instructors as "interdisciplinary." For their social studies requirement these students take a freshman course called Western Culture which does not include a discussion of the Holocaust. Three classes of

ninth graders in this high school were not available for use as a con' trol group. Nevertheless, four classes of approximately 19 students each served as a control for purposes of comparing the effects of the unit on the attitudes, problem-solving abilities, and knowledge of

the Holocaust with the experimental group.

It is important to note here that the final population from the

control and experimental groups was smaller than the total number of

students in the classes involved in the study. Due to absences, either

during the pre- or post-test , 18 of the students in the control group did not have two sets of scores for correlation and thus their pre— or post-test had to be excluded, thus reducing the number in the control 109 group to 60. Also due to absences, the experimental group was reduced to lkU y and in order to bring this number closer to that of the control group, I randomly halved that number to 72. At the completion of the post-test and the determination of the fact that lUU students had taken both pre- and post-tests, the post-tests of those ikk students were placed in two piles, one containing the tests of the average students and the other containing the tests of the above average students. These tests were then shuffled and every other one was selected for scoring and use in the correlations along with matching pre-tests.

The pre-test was administered to both groups one day apart, beginning on the first day after the February vacation. The four teachers were given instructions on how to administer the test. (See Ap- pendix for Instructions to Teachers.) I administered the pre-test to the control group.

The post-test was administered two days before school closed for

April vacation and administration procedures were the same as that for the pre-test. Students were given a post-test in order to determine changes in their knowledge and attitudes after seven weeks of involvement with Holocaust material. Also measured was their ability to integrate disciplines in order to solve problems related to the Holocaust as well as their ability to apply their learning to contemporary issues. The different levels of intellectual ability, the student’s sex, and period of the day (s)he took the class were variables that were analyzed for their interaction effects, together with the variables of knowledge and attitudes resulting from the treatment. 110

In addition to these variables already singled out for their interaction effects, possible intervening variables will be discussed. Such variables include the level of maturity of the students; the degree of the students- previous knowledge and exposure to material being taught; the anxieties and motivations of students towards school, social studies, and learning itself; the degree of receptivity of teachers and students to my presence in the class; and the motivation of the teachers and their level of expectations for their students.

Instruments

The data related to the four research questions were collected through the use of four instruments: a pre-test for students and an interview with teachers given at the outset of the unit; and a post-

test for students and an interview with teachers given at the completion of the unit. A pilot test of the pre- and post-test instruments was carried out and raters were hired and trained to help establish

instrument reliability.

The pre-test for students was designed to help determine their attitudes and previous knowledge of the central concepts embodied in the Holocaust unit. Two standardized attitude scales were chosen for this purpose, one measuring anti-democratic attitudes, the other anti-

Semitic ( anti-Jewish) attitudes. Three open-ended essay-type questions and one short-answer question were designed to measure prior and post- knowledge and understanding of eight substantive interdisicplinary issues contained in the Holocaust unit (see list below), as well as to

disciplines test the students ' prior and post ability to integrate the Ill in solving problems related to contemporary issues and to the fol- loving key concepts:

1. good vs. evil (humanity vs. inhumanity)

2. individual vs. collective responsibility (and guilt) 3. prejudice vs. tolerance

b. resistance vs. obedience (or silence) to authority

5. nationalism vs. universalism

6. totalitarianism vs. democracy

7. faith vs. skepticism

8. ignorance vs. knowledge

The concepts are interdisciplinary in nature in that ideas from several disciplines must be brought to bear on these concepts if the students are to grasp their roles in history and in the world today.

In addition, each of the concepts has meaning within a wide range of different disciplines.

In this chapter , the actual test items on the evaluation instruments will be presented and discussed in conjunction with the research questions they were meant to answer. Thus, the four research questions and the test items linked to them now follow:

Research Questions

#1: What are students learning as a result of exposure to an interdisciplinary curriculum?

Test Question A (prejudice), B (comparison of dilemmas), and C.l.

(Holocaust) are items which were designed to indicate the students' general substantive learning, their ability to solve problems, and explain concepts based specifically on Holocaust-related material. These :

112

items required students to incorporate information from the different disciplines that were drawn upon during the unit. Answers given reflect the students' knowledge of the eight interdisciplinary paired concepts noted earlier as well as their awareness of the uses of diverse perspectives as they relate to the problems given. Question A (prejudice) relates to the concept of prejudice. This question appeared first on the test and was worded as follows:

A. e great roblem- s °lver, e? P so the President of\hp Tln?r^United States+ asks you l to recommend some steps he should take in order to create a country that is free from the disease of prejudice. Some steps the President should take in order to bring about a country free from prejudice are :

Several lines were provided for the students' answer.

Question B (- dilemmas) required the student to compare an historical dilemma related to the Holocaust with a contemporary dilemma which the student may or may not have been familiar with. The student had to identify at least two of the several conceptual relationships that might exist between the two. Question B on the test instrument read as follows

B. Below are two related problems or dilemmas. Read each one carefully:

Dilemma Pre-World War II :

An American manufacturer in 1938 (pre-World War II) who is aware of Hitler's anti-Jewish policies, must decide if he will sell weapons and machinery to Hit- ler or reduce his production and lay off workers.

Current Problem :

An American manufacturer who sells weapons ' parts to South Africa is aware of the extreme segregation policy of that government. He must decide if he will continue to sell to the white minority government or give up one of his biggest importers. : —

113

Question : Before these two manufacturers can solve their problem, both of them will be forced to ask themselves the same questions. What are two questions they first might ask themselves?

(The dilemmas above appeared on the pre-test. A pair of dilemmas equivalent to those above appeared on the post-test and read as follows

Dilemma During World War II ;

A German teenager must decide if (s)he will lie when asked by the Gestapo about where his Jewish friend is hiding or tell the truth—that he is hiding in his attic.

Past Problem :

During the Vietnam War, an American teenager of nineteen who is against United States' involvement in Vietnam must decide if he will answer his draft board's call or find a way to Canada.

Question C.l. (Holocaust) appeared unchanged on both pre- and post-tests and was directly related to the students ' grasp of the diverse causes of the Holocaust. This question read:

C.l. How would you answer a ten-year-old who asked you, "Why did the Holocaust happen?

Scoring for Question A (prejudice) and C.l. (Holocaust) was similar. Points were allotted to students based on their use of a wide range of concepts or answers. These were arranged in the Answer Key under 10 disciplines (Key for Question A) and lH disciplines (Key for

Question C.l.).* A student was awarded two points for every answer given which came from a different discipline. Ideally, then, a student with an ability to tap all disciplines referred to in the Key,

*The Answer Keys —as well as copies of the test instruments appear in the Appendix. C.

could earn 20 to 28 respective*. „ _ ^ Siven ^ _ from a discipline already referred tQ at leMt ^ ^ ^ tional usage of a perspective was awarded a single p^. Scoring for Question B (dilemmas) was based on an allotment of three points each for the two responses required. Thus a student vho satisfactorily answered this question would receive six points, hut could also receive an additional three to six points if (s)he combined two correct answers into one in each of their required responses. Eleven to fourteen possible responses were listed in the Answer Key for this question. Use of any of these indicated that the student understood some of the key conceptual relationships between the two dilemmas posed in the pre- and post-tests. — &n st udents apply interd i sp-i-pi P conr^-n+Q , Ing to hi storical E 2 lem-solv- and Lntemporary j S sS^? T est item A (prejudice ,B (dilemmas) ) and C.l. (Holocaust) were also used to measure the students’ ability to apply their learning to historical and contemporary issues since prejudice (A) is a timeless

problem, the dilemmas (B) were both historical and contemporary, and the Holocaust (C.l.) was the central historical issue of the curriculum. Item A directly related to the paired concepts "prejudice vs. tolerance." Item B‘s dilemmas touched on the concepts of "collective vs. individual responsibility, resistance vs. obedience to authority, totalitarianism vs. democracy, and ignorance vs. knowledge" among others

The fourth test item, designed to identify the knowledge of the student, provided additional data for Research Question #2. Question 115

C.2. (unrelated issues) was used to test students- ability to analyse and discuss a contemporary issue (unrelated to the Holocaust) by drawing from several disciplines in order to clariiy and explain the issue. The pre-test version of Question C.2. related to the local community: the location and building of a dump. The post-test version dealt with questions and decision-making about a proposed bypass. Both the dump and the bypass are local issues confronting the students' communities. One of the objectives of the Holocaust unit was to help students view problems from interdisciplinary perspectives. The purpose of Question C.2. was to see if students would then transfer this approach from its application to Holocaust-related issues to issues currently confronting their towns.

Question C.2. on the pre-test was posed as follows:

C.2. You are a selectman and you attend the local town meeting at which all of the opinions and thoughts related to the location of the proposed dump will be voiced. List some of the ideas you might expect to hear that might influence your decision about the location and construction of the dump.

(The post-test version was the same except that the word "bypass”

was substituted for "dump.")

Scoring for Question C.2. was similar to that for Questions A and

C.l. Two points were allotted for every response that represented a

different perspective. A single point was given for any additional responses from perspectives already utilized. Five ways of looking at a problem (i.e. political, economic) were arranged with several, possible answers listed below each perspective in the Answer Key for

C.2., which appear in chart form. 116

—jfoat chan ges j n attitude result?

In addition to measuring the kinds of substantive concept learning the students experienced, changes in attitude were also measured. Two scales, were selected for that purpose. Both were established instruments.* The interpretation of the results on these scales were based on the purposes and scoring information provided by the authors of each scale.

One scale dealt with anti-Semitic attitudes or stereotypical attitudes towards Jews. This scale was labelled "Opinions on Jews" on the evaluation instrument. The other scale measured anti-democratic attitudes and we labelled "Public Opinions" on the test instrument. The public opinion scale contained items related to attitudes toward authority, conformity, obedience to law, power and introspection.

One underlying objective of the unit was to reduce students' prejudices against all minorities, not Jews only. H. J. Eysenck and

S. Crown are the authors of the scale "Opinions on the Jews." The questionnaire , which contained 2h different opinions on Jews, asked subjects to respond to each item by endorsing one of the five Likert- type alternatives (strongly agree, agree, uncertain, disagree, strongly disagree). The responses have been weighted from 5 to 1 with a score of 5 indicating strong agreement and 1 indicating strong dis- agreement. Twelve items were phrased in a negative way and in such

*H. J. Eysenck and S. Crown, "National Stereotypes: An Experiment and Methodological Study." International Journal of Opinion Attitudes Research 2 (19^8) 26-39* in Marvin E. Shaw and Jack M. Wright, Scales for the Measurement of Attitudes , New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967* PP* 390- 393. Gertrude Selznick and Stephen Steinberg. The Tenacity of Preju- dice . New York: Harper Torchbook, 1969 . ) . —

117

cases the weights were reversed for the purpose of scoring. The subject's score is the sum of the weighted alternatives endorsed by him. High scores indicated anti-Semitic attitudes. Reliability and validity had been established by the test authors. The neutral point, when assessed using Guttman's procedures, was found to fall in the score- class interval of 62-66, or one standard deviation below the mean of possible scores. (For a copy of the scale and questions, see the

Appendix .

The Public Opinion—or anti-democratic attitude scale—was part of a lengthy questionnaire developed by the Survey Research Center at the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. This scale was published by Gertrude Selznick and Stephen Steinberg

in The Tenacity o f - Prejudice , a report of contemporary anti-Semitism

in America. Since the items in their scale were meant to measure fascistic attitudes, most of the items were adapted from T. Adorno's

(et al) well-known F-scale or fascist scale, which was developed as

a covert measure of anti-Semitism. Reliability and validity of the

original form of the scale are discussed by Adorno and others in The

Authoritarian Personality (2h2-2hh) The first five items in the Selz-

nick and Steinberg scales were taken directly—or in simplified form

from the Adorno scale.* I labelled the scale as a "Public Opinions"

scale based on the labelling of a similar scale written by A. L. Ed-

*An example of an item from Adorno is presented here and following it is the simplified version of that item worded by Selznick and Steinberg: Adorno (p. 239): "To a greater extent than most people realize, our lives are governed by plots hatched in secret by politi-

cians." Selznick and Steinberg : (p. lUo): "Much of our lives is controlled by plots hatched in secret places." 118

wards (19I.I). In the case of the Selznick and Steinberg study, the interviewee was told: "I am going to read you some things that some people believe and some people don't. For each statement, please tell me to what extent you agree or disagree." Based on the Selznick and Steinberg approach, I decided that "Public Opinions" was an appropriate label for this scale.

In their book The Authoritarian Personality . Adorno and his colleagues describe the scales they devised in order to measure anti- democratic ("fascist, authoritarian") attitudes as veil as anti-Semi- tic attitudes held by several groups in our society in the late 19Uo's, whereas the purpose of Selznick and Steinberg’s study was to assess the extent and nature of contemporary anti-Semitism two decades after

the end of World War II. Adorno’s interpretation of the origin of

beliefs was that they were expressions of deep—lying personality

trends laid down in early childhood, i.e., F-beliefs have a psycholog-

ical source. Subsequent research, such as that in The Tenacity of

Prejudice , found that scores on fascism were highly dependent on ed-

ucation, i.e., F-beliefs have an intellectual source. Anti-democra-

tic attitudes, Selznick and Steinberg found, decreased with greater

education (pp. 138-lUl). Therefore, these authors used the term

"intellectually simplistic" for such F values or anti-democratic attitudes because they believed that high scores on fascism were related to lack of education or "an intellectual failure to comprehend

complexity and to accept ambiguity . . ." (p. lUl). According to Selz- nick and Steinberg, "Both the original F-scale (Adorno’s) and (Selz- nick ’s) Index of Simplism axe samples from a very large universe of be- 119

liefs and attitudes that indicate lack of intellectual sophistica- tion. One vould expect education to correlate strongly with any such measure, regardless of content of its component items” (Hu). The scoring for Selznick and Steinberg’s scale was the same as that used for the Eysenck and Crown "Opinions on the Jews" scale.

They combined their items into an index whereby scores of 3 or more were designated as high on "F" or anti-democratic attitudes. A Likert-type response mode was also used and responses were weighted in the same way. I had one question with regard to validity which Selznick and Steinberg do not note. A great majority of the items are worded in the same direction, that is, in an anti-democratic direction. This wording can possibly allow for a response set to operate. That is, the high and low scores that are being discriminated by the items may be the result of "yea— sayers" and "nay—sayers ."

The scale might have been better if additional positive (pro-democratic) items were included. According to Guttman's procedures the neutral attitude level on this scale was determined to be a score of

UO to hh. tfh: What are the characteristics and methodologies of those teachers who are implementing the unit?

Interviewswere conducted with each of the four teachers who im-

lemented the unit at separate times , both before they began teaching the seven-week unit and after they had completed it. The initial interview, which took place one week prior to the teaching of the unit, contained items which were designed to determine their educational background, teaching experience, values, and attitudes toward the

and their teach- material , as well as their knowledge of the material ~

120

ing objectives. (The pre- and post-teaching interview questions appear in the Appendix.) Some specific aspects about the teacher's backgrounds that might influence effects of the unit are identified below:

- Their number of years in teaching and what they have taught or what other occupations they had;

- Their educational background, i.e. major as an undergraduate; Master's? Post-Masters" and in what field? Any interdisciplinary courses?

Their prior knowledge of the unit as student or as a teacher?

When they first learned about the Holocaust? - Their contact with personal prejudice of any type;

- Their preferred style of teaching;

- Any doubts or questions about teaching this unit? If so, what?

- What do they feel is the real importance of teaching the material?

The interview with the teachers following the teaching of the

unit involved questions related to the methodologies they U3ed in

teaching the material; their feelings about the students' reactions

in class to the unit and whether or not they (teachers) fulfilled

their earlier objectives. Teachers were also asked about their use

of varied materials and the use of people outside the Social Studies

Department that might have contributed to the unit. This interview took place one week after the completion of the unit, April 21+-26,

1978.

In the role of participant observer, I visited each classroom :

121 six times to observe the teaching of the unit in order to note the following factors

A. Verbal Presentation (teachers):

1* How much time each teacher spends on a particular part of the unit;

2. • What interdisciplinary references do they make (directly or indirectly)?

3. What subjective/objective comments are made, especially subjective, related to the content of the unit?

h. To what extent does the teacher discuss content of readings assigned earlier (number and kinds of reading assignments given)?

5» What style of teaching is used and how often? (i.e. lecture, discussion, small groups, activities planned)?

6 What kinds of questions are asked of students?

7- ypes of evaluative instruments and/or projects assigned to students and what they seem to measure?

B. Degree of student participation:

1. How often do students ask questions?

2. How often do they respond to questions and what kinds of answers do they give?

3. Student reactions to films and other media presented in class;

h . How much discussion is there among students themselves?

C. The use and quality of audio-visual aids and/or student-created projects and the use of outside speakers.

Results of these observations are contained in a description of the teaching methodology used at Monument Mountain Regional High School in relation to the Holocaust unit. (See Appendix.) 122

The teacher* ' answers to the interview questions along with the observations made of the teaching of the unit suggest a modification of the approaches to the instruction of the Holocuast unit—and similar units—in future years. However, I do not correlate student outcomes on the pre- and post-tests with teacher behavior and ability.

The reason for this decision is based on a meeting with teachers at which I explained my proposal and intentions. They agreed to cooper- ate with my procedures if I promised not to evaluate their teaching methods and style. Thus, results will not be presented by single class outcomes, but, rather, by whole group outcomes, that is, by experimental group outcomes and control group results.

Pilot Test of Instruments and Rater Training; Procedures for Adminis- tration of Pre- and Post Tests

A pilot test of the instrument —four knowledge questions and two attitude scales —was carried out in October, 1977. Twenty-three high school students of average ability*—not among the subjects of the experiment—were asked to take the tests, which included both pre- and post-test forms of Questions B (paired dilemmas) and C.2. (unrelated issue). There were 12 pre-test versions and 11 similarly-worded post- test versions, although no such labels existed to distinguish between them. By splitting the pilot test into two equivalent tests, I hoped that the raters could observe, through the use of the Answer Key in scoring, whether or not students showed a consistency in their approach or answers to these equivalent questions. Three raters were hired and

•These students were average in ability based on reading scores and on cumulative grade point averages in their English classes. 123 trained by me to use the Answer Key provided for the knowledge questions.* The same set of tests (in groups of seven) was given to each rater so that following the correcting of each set they could come together to discuss their use of the Key and compare their interpretations of student responses.

Because few students demonstrated an ability to answer these questions, it was difficult to establish much reliability at first.

However, after three such training sessions, the raters concluded that the students who did the pre-test versions of Questions B and

C.2. exhibited answers consistent with those given by students doing the post-test version, and thus I considered the items to be equivalent and fairly reliable.

The pilot students reported that some of the language used in the directions given for essay questions was "unclear" and "wordy."

They also reported that had they known the answers to the test questions they probably would have needed more time in which to complete the test.

As a result, the directions were simplified greatly and a four- part short-answer question was omitted from the instrument, leaving four knowledge items. After the pilot test took place, the raters discussed with me their difficulties in using the Key. They recommended that additions be made to the Answer Key and these changes were

*These raters had all had contact with high school students. Two are librarians in the county and work in the reference section of a public library. The third rater is a former high school English teacher who does substitute work. 1214

made. (The Key and all scoring sheets provided for the raters appear in the Appendix.)

I held an instructional session of twenty-minutes with the four

teachers in order to clarify how the tests should be administered and how the teachers were to answer any questions the students might have about the directions and test itself (See Appendix for the sheet of instructions given to participating teachers). One week later-after students returned from their February vacation—these teachers administered the pre-test. They distributed 3x5 cards and asked students to place their names on the card and next to it the number at the top of their pre-test. A simple explanation was given: "You will remain anonymous. However, in order to compare your answers on this questionnaire to the answers you give at the completion of the unit, we will need to know which two questionnaires to compare. Once the two numbers have been matched, your names will be totally eliminated.”

The same pre-test and instructions were administered to the control group by me. In the case of this group, students were told that the researcher was interested in finding out what typical ninth-graders thought and knew about certain concepts. They were told that because they might be asked these same questions at a future time, the researcher would need some way of matching this set of answers to a possible second set. These students also filled out 3x5 cards.

Seven weeks later, the same instructions were given to both groups before they took the post-test on April 11 and 13 respectively.

I then matched the two sets of students' cards, and discarded those from students who had only taken one of the two tests. The re- 125 suit was two sets of ihU tests from students in the experimental group and two sets of 60 tests from students in the control group.

The Ikh tests was reduced to 72 by randomly selecting every other one from a pile of Level 1 and Level 2 tests, thus leaving 72 in the experimental group and 60 in the control group to be scored.

Reliability and Validity of Instrument

In order to establish reliability of the instrument and Answer Key, the following steps were taken. A pile was made of the pre- and post-tests that had been randomly excluded from the experimental group's tests. From this pile of mixed pre- and post-tests, three sets of six tests were randomly selected. The first set of six tests was xeroxed and distributed to each of the raters. They were given scoring sheets to record points they gave for each answer. After the scoring sheets were returned, I then established correlations between the pairs of raters (AB, BC, AC) using the Pearson Product-Moment Cor- relation Coefficient. The correlation coefficients for each pair of raters were then averaged, using Fischer's z transformation to arrive at a reliability figure.

The sigma score (z) is a useful device for it reduces scores in any type of distribution to a common, comparable unit of measure. In comparing or averaging scores on tests where total point values differ, the use of raw scores to compute a mean or average may create a false basis for comparison. The z score makes possible equal weight- ing of the tests (Best, 219). The results of the correlation of the scores of the three raters on the first set of six tests was r = .75^.

After the raters offered additional feedback the Answer Key was fur- .

126

ther altered and answers In some cases were more clearly worded. Items were also added to parts of the Key. Raters were Instructed at a twenty-minute session to interpret the students’ answers as correct only if their responses could be found in the Key. Then a second set of six tests was given to the raters. After correlations between pairs of raters were done the reliability was .772. The raters were instructed to adhere as closely as possible to the An- swer Key when correcting the third set of six tests. After averaging the coefficients for each pair of raters for this third set, the

result was r = . a 92 , highly reliable correlation.

Once the reliability of the instrument and Answer Key was established, the three raters completed the scoring of the pre- and post- tests during the Summer of 1978. The combined number of these tests for both groups was 2 6k. These tests were combined and then divided into three sets, each rater receiving eighty-eight tests to correct.

The content validity of the instrument was checked by giving the

instrument to a control group as well as to the experimental group.

A comparison of the results indicated the validity of item C.l. (Holo-

caust )

I asked the four teachers involved in the unit what were their

objectives in teaching this unit. They all responded that they want-

ed students to gain an understanding of prejudice (Question A.). They

noted that the problem of prejudice was approached from several per-

spectives in the unit. They all stressed the importance of bringing the Holocaust up to date by comparing aspects of it to contemporary and past problems and issues (Question B). The Holocaust essay (C.l.) 127

and the other items were related to the teachers' objectives and tested these goals in an open-ended way. The Holocaust unit was designed to bring to this historical event as many diverse perspectives as possible in order to help students comprehend-or at least analyze a most complex and unbelievable historical catastrophe. Assum- ing the student is successful in tackling the Holocaust from a variety of perspectives, I would also hope he could apply such an approach to issues unrelated to the Holocaust. Thus Question 0.2. (unrelated issues) served the purpose of testing the student's ability to apply the convergence concept.

After the raters scored all the tests, and the sms of the responses on the attitude scales were determined, the following variables were entered for analysis: each student's scores on knowledge questions (A, B, C.I., C.2.) and attitude scales (on Jews, public opinions) for both pre— and post—tests, along with five other variables, i.e. the student's pre-test number as a means of identification; his/her sex; their group, experimental or control; their level within the group; and the period of the day the class met, altogether, seventeen items of information. "The Statistical Package for the

Social Sciences" was the computer program applied to the variables.

Statistical Measures

The above data were analyzed to determine what, if any, significant changes took place in scores from pre- to post-tests. The

"Statistical Package for the Social Sciences" was the source of information used in determining which measures to use and how to apply these. Three statistical measures were applied to the data in order to assess to what extent the treatment changed the Knowledge and attitudes of the experimental group by comparing their scores on pre- and post-tests to those of the control group. The following statistical measures were used: A. F-tests were run to determine the equality of variance in the pre-test scores of both groups, that is, to determine whether or not the differences between the two groups to begin with were significant.

B. Randomization t-tests were run to determine whether the difference between the mean scores and mean gains of the experimental and control groups were significant or not at a .01 level of confidence. This procedure involved comparing the pre-tests on each variable (knowledge

items and attitudes) and comparing gain scores of the two groups for each variable to see which group made

a greater gain and whether or not the gain was signi-

ficant.

C. Planned comparisons were done, using within-cells error

terms from a three-way analysis of variance (anova) to

determine the overall effects on knowledge gain and at-

titude gain of three variables: sex, class period, and

level of group. Analyses of variance were run on atti-

tude and knowledge gain to determine the overall effects

of each of these variables separately, as well as their

effect together, i.e. interaction effect.

Finally , a comparison was made of the frequency distributions of gain in the two groups, as well as a comparison of the percent of 129 those improving" in each group.

The results of these tests were designed to answer the four re search questions of this study. CHAPTER V

RESULTS OF THE STUDY

The findings of this evaluative study indicate that the experimental group increased overall in knowledge, particularly i n reference to the diverse causes of the Holocaust whereas the control group did not demonstrate an increase from pre- to post-test. While the two groups showed little variance on both pre-test attitude scales, the experimental group changed significantly from pre- to post-test

J on the anti-Semitism scale with 6Q% of the students receiving a lower score on the post—test, thereby indicating a decrease in anti-

Semitic response.

A more detailed discussion of the findings are presented under the four research questions to which they relate.

Research Question 01: What are students learning as a result of exposure to an interdisciplinary curriculum?

a. What substantive knowledge are they gaining?

b. Are students able to use knowledge from several disciplines

to solve problems and explain concepts presented in the unit?

In order to measure the students ' concept learning and their ability to use knowledge from several disciplines to solve problems presented in the unit, three test items, A, B, and C.I., were presented.

These items are referred to in this section as A (prejudice), B (dilemmas), and C.l. (Holocaust).

Students in the experimental group demonstrated a gain in mean scores on all three questions from pre- to post-test. This group showed a significantly greater gain (at the .01 level) than did the control group on C.l. (Holocaust), the question dealing with the Holo- 130 131 caust as approached from an interdisciplinary perspective. Although the gains on A and B were also greater for the experimental group, these gains were not statistically significant.

Table #1 and #1.1 indicate the mean scores on pre- and post-tests for knowledge variables A, B, and C.l. and mean scores on the gains (Table #1.1) for the two groups. According to an analysis of variance (anova), there was initially a significant difference in their knowledge on Questions A (prejudice) and C.l. (Holocaust). Nevertheless, the gain in score by the experimental group on C.l. was still significant at the .01 level. 132

TABLE Hi

MEAN OF THE TOTAL SCORES FOR KNOWLEDGE h fob TOTAL GBOUP, EXPBBIMESr^^S’cSf^

Variables Whole Group s Experimental (132) s Control (72) s (60) Total Pre-Test 8.909(pts) Essay 5.596 10.375 6.019 7.150 Total Post-Test 1* .1*90 * 10.863 6.950 * Essay 13.819 7.209 7.316 1* .608 Pre-Essay A 2.21*2 2.268 2.805 * 2.5^3 Post-Essay 1.566 1.671 A 2.371 2.166 3.111 2.365 1.1*83 1.1*90 Pre-Essay B 2.31*0 2.261* 2.1*58 Post-Essay 2.379 2.200 2.129 B 2.613 2.356 3.000 2.1*ll* 2.150 2.215 Pre-Essay C.l. 1.015 1.567 1.388 * 1.756 . 566 1.169 Post-Essay C.l. * 2.212 .396 3.277 * 2.513 • 933 1. 1*1*8

Pre-Essay C.2. 3.310 2.51*1 3.722 2.65I* 2.8l6 2.325 Post-Essay C.2. 3.666 3.06o 1* .1*30 3.339 2.750 2.1+12

significant at the .01 level of confidence ) ) )

133

TABLE #1.1

MEAN SCORES ON THE GAINS FOR KNOWLEDGE (ESSAY) VARIABLES FOR TOTAL GROUP , EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS

Gains in Scores of Whole Group s Experimental s Control s Variables

Total Essay- 1 .95l*(pts 6.111 3.111* Score 6.887 .166 1.16

Essay A .128 (Prej udice) 2.551 .305 3.156 -.083 1.551

Essay B .272 3.021 (Dilemmas • 5ll 3.311 -.050 2.619

Essay C.l. 1.197 2.163 1.888* 2.135 .366 1.I01 (Holocaust

Essay C.2. .356 3.089 .708 3.303 -.066 2.779 (Unrelated Issue)

* significant at the .01 level of confidence 13U

Table #2 presents the Frequency Distributions of total pre- and post-test essay scores for the two groups. This table, like the two before, shows that in spite of the initially greater knowledge of the experimental group compared to the control group, a significantly larger number of the experimental group gained in knowledge on the overall essay variables.

TABLE #2

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS OF TOTAL PRE- AND POST-TEST ESSAY SCORES

Scores PRE-I’EST POST-TEST in Experimental Control Experimental Control Points

O-lU 77.8# (56) 95# (57) 58. U# (U2) 93.3# (56)

15-32 22.2# (16) 5 # (3) 1*1.6# (30) 6.7# (4)

100# 72(N) 100# 6o(n) 100# 72(N) ioo# 6 o(n) 135

A more specific indication of the results on Questions A, B, and C.l. is given in Tables #3 and # 3 . 1 , which present the frequency distributions for gains in total essay score (Table # 3 ) and for gains on the three individual essay questions (Table # 3 . 1 ). From Table # 3.1 it can be seen that in the case of every variable, a greater percent of the experimental group shoved gains from the pre- to the post-test than did the control group, and that there was a significantly greater percent of the experimental group demonstrat- ing a gain on C.l. (Holocaust). 57.3* of this group improved their scores on C.l. whereas only . of 23 3? the control group exhibited some gain on this question.

TABLE #3

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR GAINS IN TOTAL ESSAY SCORE

Students Experimental Control Group Group Those who gained in score from 69.6# (50) 53 . U# ( 32 ) 1 to 27 points

Those who stayed 1 +. 2# ( 3 ) 6.6# 4 the same ( )

Those who went 26.2# (19) U0.0# (21+) down 1 to 12 pts.

100# 72 (N) 100# 6o(n) i

136

3 O O CO p co 3 3 H»*d ^ 3 H CO 3 3 s' P* O' 3 c+ O Pi 3* o 0 o o O Table co B c+ CO B CO CO P 3 H* CD O' 3 3 t+ c+ H 3 3 p 3 CO Pi 3 # c+ co O' co O' C+ O t 3 B Pi O O o o o o O 3 3 3.1 O | 3 OO 3 c+ O 3 3 CO VO 3 05 co CD c+ P < Pi 3 f0 3 H 3 P c+ 3 £ ct 3 Pi P CO 1 1 3 3 presents CO r»r CO 8 3 p H CO ro CO 3 o << the ro O '—'VO ro •—' VO 3 o ro • r—1 . • t ro H* 3 53 Vi CD o on o c» o 3 p — Vi ^ Vi ^ Vi 3 3 £ CO 3 3 c+ e+ H‘ P O o percent r—1 3 3 CO c+ JD V ON H ro 3 and o cn ro 3 — o H ON 3 w ' o H 00 • H • 53 Vi co H ON ON M •Vi Vi M O ^ '-'Vi O O 3) p 53 53 3 number CO CO VcT Pi > 31 3 O - o £ » of H ro ro w =«s ro O ‘VO ^vo - Q CO O ro • • O ro CO *1 53 Vi ro H ro O ON H Vi Vi 3 a go £ students o o 3 •H ss • M P P in 53 3 CO ON VJl H ro ro bd O co <+ o o H ' ' VJl '—'CO M c+ 3 ^ o CO • I-* • < H- P 53 Vi CO CO O -P-CO M O c+ both •Vi Vi Vi O 3 3 cn co

c+ & 3* £ M 3 groups >3 CO —J I— CO cn 3 CO ro o '-"Ol J 3 > — o -P" . ro P- • H- K 53 Vi —' ro V/l H CO B o' who Vi • Vi ^ Vi 3 3 3 3 c+ P P H 3 Pi 3 ON H ON ro 3 demonstrated O O CD CD co 3 ^ O VJ1 • P" • H • • O 53 Vi —' -P" H CO -P- co 3 Vi Vi ^ Vi 3 <+ O 3> 3 gains P O 3* or 137

Although the initial differences between the two groups on the pre-test knowledge scores was significant and, thus, groups were not equal to begin with, this situation did not greatly alter the fact that there was a significant difference (at the .01 level) in the overall gam scores between the two groups from pre- to post-test. The experimental group, although scoring approximately three points higher on the pre-tests, a . showed mean gain of 3 1+U points on the post-tests, whereas the control groups, although starting out with a lower score, showed a mean gain of only .17 on the post-tests

(see Table #1.1). 138

Research Question !» Can students anplv

All four knowledge questions were designed to measure the st- ability to apply interdisciplinary concepts and problem-solving to historical and contemporary issues. Questions A (prejudice ) ,B (dilemmas), and C.l. (Holocaust) were used also to measure students' learning related to material presented m the Holocaust unit. However, the fourth knowledge question, C.2., required students to analyze and discuss a contemporary issue unrelated to the Holocaust by drawing from many fields of thought in order to clarify and explain the issue. The pre-test version of C.2. related to the community issue of the location and building of a dump. The post-test version dealt with questions and decision-making about a proposed by-pass. The Holocaust unit was designed to assist in viewing problems and issues from interdisciplinary perspectives.

The purpose of Question C.2. was to see if students would then trans-

fer this approach in proposing solutions to current issues confront-

ing their communities.

The results on Questions A (prejudice), B (dilemmas), and C.l.

(Holocaust) were discussed above in reference to Research Question #1.

(See Tables #1 to #3.1.) These outcomes revealed that the experimental group improved from pre- to post-test whereas the control group did not, and that the number of students in the experimental group showing a gain on total essay score was significantly greater than the number that improved in the control group.

Table presents, therefore, only the frequency distributions for gains on Question C.2. (unrelated issues). (The data for C.2. is pre- .

139 sented with data for other knowledge questions in Tables #1, l.i, 2, and 3.) The number of students from the experimental group who gained in scores on this question was greater than the number of students from the control group who gained. However, Just as in the gains shown in Questions A (prejudice) and B (dilemmas), the gam on Question C.2. was not significantly different for the two groups

TABLE Hk

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR GAINS ON ESSAY QUESTION C.2. (UNRELATED ISSUES —DUMP, BY-PASS)

STUDENTS EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL Those who gained in scores 50.0# (36) 36.7# (22) from 1 to 9 pts. Those who stayed the same 18 . 0# (13) 25# (15) Those who drop- ped in score 32.0# (23) 38.3# (23) from 1 to 8 pts.

*• 100# T2(N) 100# 60(N) in attitude results?

In addition to measuring the changes in the students* substantive concept learning and ways of thinking, changes in attitude were also measured. Two attitude scales were chosen on the basis of their relationship to the eight paired concepts (listed earlier) which comprise much of the unit. An attitude scale measuring anti-Semitism

(Eysenck and Crown) and a scale (Selznick and Steinberg's Adaptation of Adorno's F-scale, referred to as a public opinion scale) that measured anti -democratic attitudes were selected. These two sets of attitude measurements related most directly to the following paired concepts: prejudice vs. tolerance, and totalitarianism vs. democracy.

Because of the limitations of such scales, i.e. their inability to test student behavior on the basis of attitude responses, it would

be unwise to label a student "undemocratic" or "prejudiced" based on

their scores. However, there is value in noting the percent and

number of students whose scores went down on each scale. A downward

shift on both scales would seem to indicate a decrease in negative

attitudes or a decrease in anti-democratic, anti-Semitic attitudes, whereas an increase in scores might indicate students' attitudes went

in a more anti-democratic, anti-Semitic direction.

An F-test to determine the degree of variance between the two groups on the pre-test showed the two groups —experimental and control—not to be significantly different in attitude on both scales.

That is, both groups on the pre-test had an almost identical mean score of 58 points. The difference between the two groups on the post-test attitudes toward Jews, however, was shown to be significant at a .01 level. The experimental group shoved a signifieant decrease in points on the post-test anti-Semitism scale (-2.K72), whereas the control group shoved a slight increase (.983). On the public opinion or anti-democratic attitudes scale, no significant increase or decrease in scores occurred, Thus, students in both groups did not show any significant changes in pro- or anti-democratic attitudes. (See Tables #5 and #5.1.) J

y P > O Q 3 O c+ P> P 3J 3> & P P P y e. > P •< 3 o' c+ CD O P CD P 3 c+ >3 o' p P P P CO o' P P P P 3 H* 3 p 3 P O P Cl> 3) p P CO CO co P 3 P P 3 P P *J P O CO O 3 CO 3 MEAN TOTAL 1 O o Co p p p * P P VI VI S3 OO p 1 CO P\ o\ —4 OO 3 OF o ON • ro Q co • • • O H* P o ro — 3 p p GROUP, (ft ro o \o vo ro P P THE 3 3 P o O P OO significant 3 H* ro o P> -1—>* P 3 o O c+ P VO 3 TOTAL • CO >3 CO O H c+ at P VO

vi CD P EXPERIMENTAL c+ vi vi VO VO • • • • SCORES the f P p ro VO VI CO 3* OO OO on p 1 s s P oo —q P VI ro W .01 oo P on M FOR o —5 (72) RIMH GROUP, vi ro P P VI VI $ H CT\ VI a\ CD p level * P • • • • -0 3

The mean score for the experimental group on the post-test anti-Semitism scale vas 56 , whereas that of the control group remained at 58. As noted above, a decrease on this scale is desirable because lower scores indicate a downward turn in anti-Semitism. The neutral point, according to Eysenck and Crown, is considered to be between 62 and 66 , thus indicating that neigher group had particularly high scores on this scale in the first place (See Table #7). Nevertheless, the experimental group demonstrated a significantly greater decrease in points than did the control group.

The mean score on the public opinion scale for the experimental group on the pre-test vas 45.694 and for the control group, 46 . 566 . Both of these scores indicate that neither group vas particularly high or lov on this scale to begin vith, since 40-44 is considered the neutral score (determined by Guttman technique). The mean score on the post-test for the experimental group vas 46, vhereas it vas

46.266 for the control group. The gain for the experimental group vas .305, vhereas the control group vent dovn -.300 points (Table #5.1).

The frequency distribution tables (#6 , 6.1, 7, 7.1) indicate the number and percent of students scoring at the neutral level, above the neutral level, and belov it. These tables indicate clearly that there vas little or no change from pre-test to post-test on the anti- democratic attitudes scale (Tables #6 and 6.1), vhereas there vas a significant decrease in points for the experimental group and not the control group from pre- to post-test on the anti-Semitism scale (See

Tables #7 and 7-1 ). TABLE #6

frequency distributions on pre-tests and post-tests FOR PUBLIC OPINIONS

PRE-TEE Scores in Points >T POST-TI:st Experimental Control Experimental Control 30-39 (pro-demo- 9 - 8# 10.0# . 8 cratic direction) 9 # 10.0# ( 7 ) (6) (7) (6) Neutral 31 . 7# 23.0# 30. U# 31 . 6# Score (23) (lb) (22) ( 19 ) b^-6b (anti-democratic direction) 58 . 5 # 67.0# 59 . 8# 58. b% (b2) (bo) (b3) \ ( 35 ) 100# 100# 100# 100# 72(N) 6o(n) 72(N) 6o(n)

TABLE #6.1

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS ON GAIN SCORES IN PUBLIC OPINIONS

STUDENTS EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL Those who vent in direction of pro- democratic atti- 37 . 5 # 30 . 0# tudes (went down ( 27 ) (18)

in pts. from 1-1 1+)

Those who stayed 9 . 7 # 25.0#

the same ( 7 ) ( 15 )

Those who went in anti-democratic 52.8# U5.0#

direction (gained ( 38 ) ( 27 ) from 1 to 11 pts.)

100# 100# 72(N) 6o(n) ) )

TABLE HI

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS ON PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST FOR ATTITUDES TOWARD JEWS

Scores in PRE-TEST POST-TEST Points Experimental Control Experimental Control 30-59 (pro -Semi tic 58.7# 50.2# 69.8# ^5.0# (h2) direction) (30) (50) (27) 60-6 k 20.3# (neutral 18.2# 16.2# 25 .0# score) (15) (11) (12) (15) 65-99 ( anti-Semitic 21.0# 31.6# lU.O# 30.0# direction) (15) (19) (10) (18)

100# 100# 100# 100# 72(N) 6 o(n) 72(N) 6o(n)

TABLE #7.1

FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTIONS FOR GAIN SCORES IN ATTITUDES TOWARD JEWS

STUDENTS EXPERIMENTAL CONTROL Those who went in direction of pro- 68.0# Semitic attitude 35. 7# (U9) (21) (went down 1-29

pts . Those who stayed H.0# 10.3# the same (3) (7) Those who went in anti-Semitic dir- 28.0# 5^.0# ection (gained (20) (32) I-U9 pts.

100# 100# 72(N) 6o(n) .

1146

Thus, the two groups showed little variance on both pre-test attitude scales. Neither demonstrated significant change from pre- to post-test on the anti-democratic attitude scale, but the experimental group changed significantly from pre- to post-test on the anti-Semitism scale with 68* of the students receiving a lower score on the post-test, thereby indicating a decrease in anti-Semitic response.

Three variables were hypothesized to have possibly played a role, along with the treatment, on attitude gain and knowledge gain. To determine the overall effects of these intervening variables—

that is, sex, period of the day, and levels (average, level 2, and above average, level 1 within experimental group only )—planned com-

parisons were ; .e. The F-test showed that when sex was entered alone and looked at for its effect on more positive attitude toward

Jews_, there was a significant difference between males and females

in the experimental group, females showing a greater gain (i.e. more of a decrease in points on anti-Semitic scale). The anova on the public opinion scale showed no significant effects of this variable nor of the other two variables

When the period of the day was isolated for its effect on over-

all attitude gain , the morning classes (Periods 1-5) appeared to have a significantly greater gain (i.e. more tolerance) than the afternoon classes (Periods 6-8).

Finally, when levels (2 = average, and 1 = above average) of the groups were compared within the experimental group only, there was a significant reduction in anti-Semitism for the Level 2 group on .

the A-S scale.

However, when all three66 variablesvarlnMoo were pooled to see if they had an overall effect on . " attitude Sain, the results were not significant

The analysis of variance on knowledg^ain showed only one of the three variables to have had a significant effect. The identity of the groups Level 1 or 2-did have a signified effect on Know- ledge gain within the experimental group; Level 1 (above average) students demonstrated significantly greater increase in knowledge than Level 2 students.

The overall effects of sex and period of the day on knowledge gain were not significant among the groups. And, when all three variables were pooled to determine their interaction effect on know ledge gain, they were not shown to have a significant effect.

Thus there appears to be a significant difference among males and females in the experimental group, females showing a greater decrease in anti-Semitism, i. e . a more tolerant attitude. Second- ly, within the experimental group, the gains in knowledge by above average students were significantly greater than the knowledge gain by average students, but these students demonstrated a significantly greater decrease in anti-Semitism than did the above average students (See Diagram #l). ) )

DIAGRAM ft±

CELL MEANS FOR THE THREE-WAY ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BASED FOR SUBGROUPS ON SEX AND PERIOD OF THE DAY FOR BO™ EXPERiSt” CONTROL GROUPS AND BASED ON GROUP LEVEL FOR EXPERIMENTAL GROUP ONLY

a) Variable of Sex

Knowledge Gain Attitude Gain

Exper ( . x Control (c X c 2.50 Male .14 Male .25 1.00 4o(n) (N) 36 (40) (36)

4.62 .22 -5.87* Female Female .96 (32) (24) (32) (24)

b) Variable of Period of the Day

Knowledge Gain Attitude Gain X

X c Male Female

3.94 .44 A.M. *A.M. 2.36 -5.87 (51) (40) (28) (23) CVJ CVJ -.42 P.M. • 2.83 1.44 CVJ ^ H (20) P.M. (12) (9)

Male Female .21 .91 (29) (11) -.43 -.42 (7) (13) c) Variable of Level of Groups Within Experimental Group (Level l=above average; Level 2=average)

Knowledge Gain Attitude Gain

Level 1 Level 1 5.75* ( 16 ) .19 ( 16 ) Level 2 2.78 (56) Level 2 -3.23*( 56)

* significant at the .01 level of confidence h QU Stl ° n ft: e the charac -ga^ . t eristics £i es g and ^;of thoseth ^ teachersL , who are implement inffthe unit?

An interview was carried out with the four teachers prior to their implementing the unit in their classrooms. In this interview were items which helped to identify the teachers’ educational background, teaching experience, values and attitudes toward the material, as well as their knowledge of the material and teaching objectives. The questions reflected aspects of the teachers’ backgrounds that might have had an influence on the results of the treatment. although it was never my intention to correlate teacher behavior with student outcomes. Rather, the discussion of teacher characteristics serves the purpose of informing the reader about those people who helped to create the unit and who have taught it for four years, including the year of this study . The purpose served by the description of methodologies (See Appendix) is to illustrate the varied approaches and activities that can be used in the teaching of interdisciplinary material and to note student response to such material.

Each teacher was also interviewed at the completion of the unit so that I could assess their feelings about the degree to which they fulfilled their objectives, their evaluation of the unit itself, and their students' reactions. (See Appendix for the responses of the four teachers which appear in chart form.)

The interviews with teachers prior to their teaching revealed that all four teachers brought to the unit some experience with interdisciplinary courses, either within the social studies or in the areas of literature, science, or math. Three of the four taught courses in disciplines outside of the social studies and all four 150

teachers have taught courses in a wide variety of the social studies disciplines. All of the teachers involved have had at least ten years of high school teaching experience and each one has worked in a job setting outside of education. It has been said by some people- taxpayers in the school system, for instance—that teachers are frequently cut off from the "real” world outside of the school walls and thus lack sensitivity to the problems of others. Based on the response to Question #3 concerning jobs held outside of the teaching profession, it seems that these teachers have had a .link to the "out-

side world. ' None of the four had themselves, as students, learned much or anything at all about the Holocaust before actually teaching the unit.

The extent to which a teacher practices his or her religion is not related, perhaps, to his or her degree of empathy with victims of prejudice or with their ability to teach emotion-filled material.

However, it is interesting to note that only one of the four has remained closely affiliated with his church as a practicing Catholic, whereas three have ceased regular church-going. One of the teachers noted in response to the question on religion that he was brought up with strong values but these values weren't necessarily church-based.

None of the four had ever had any close contact with Jews or

Jewish peers before they became adults. Yet only one of the four commented that his family transmitted some negative stereotypes of

Jews. Three teachers recalled some personal experience with prejudice, one of which was related to his religion, Catholicism.

In noting points of advice about how the material ought to be 151

taught , three of the four teachers stated or implied the importance of approaching the unit from a variety of perspectives. Teacher #1 mentioned two books from very different fields , lg^, a science fiction novel, and The Mature of Prejudice, by psychologist Gordon Allport. Teacher #2 recommended using a variety of teaching devices, and Teacher #3 advised that the instructor "integrate as many perspectives as possible into the teaching to explain ideas.”

Asked what three outcomes they would like to see in their students, two of the four hoped students would gain an ability "to ask fundamental questions." They said that an accomplished skill, such as the art of inquiry, could possibly enable students to better solve

problems using different disciplines called upon by a variety of

"fundamental questions." Three expressed a desire that students’ at-

titudes become less prejudiced and more empathetic towards others

different from themselves, and three hoped that students could, by

the end of the unit, better understand man's complex nature and thus

consequently better understand their own behavior. A shared objec-

tive of three of the teachers was that students would, as a result of

the unit, be able to explain the conditions and diverse causes of

the Holocaust in order to recognize if it might happen again. In

these objectives there is a clear implication that the instructors believe that education is a key to preventing repetition of this cat-

astrophe, as well as the other events with which the Holocaust is

compared.

Responses from both interviews, the one given before and the one

given after the teaching of the unit, demonstrate that the four teach- 152

ers shared many of the same objectives. All four were very consistent from pre-interview to post-interview as to their objectives, and, in most instances, they were open about where they either failed to achieve their goals or were dubious about the outcomes. For example, three of the four, two of whom had objectives related to de- creasing prejudiced attitudes, expressed doubt as to whether the unit actually achieved that objective, one of them stating, ’’They [the students] may understand more about prejudice ... but whether they can act on or apply this understanding to their own lives I don't know. It s hard to tell ..." And two teachers commented that they believed the students learned to see the "complexities" and "diverse causes" of the Holocaust.

Certain films evoked strong reactions from students and all four teachers referred to "Night and Fog" as an extremely powerful tool in making visible that which could otherwise not be visualized. Because student disbelief is such a strong obstacle in teaching this material, this film and others were important sources. The implication in all of the teachers' responses to an inquiry about materials was that the best materials were those that made the complex causes of the event clearer and those that helped students relate the event to themselves as teenagers and to their own actions —or lack of action— in the area of individual responsibility.

All four teachers indicated some use of ideas and sources from disciplines outside of the social studies. In particular, they all incorporated literature to help explain the Holocaust. One teacher referred to his use of Nazi posters and another noted that many of 153

readings in the anthology or text were taken from nearly all of the disciplines within the social studies and some from disciplines such as music, science, and literature.

They all agreed that some form of moral education should be presented in the classroom, if not directly, then at least with an awareness by the teacher that some indirect moral education is "always going on no matter vhat you do. M

Three teachers, in additional comments, stated that the students needed to learn more about anti-Semitism and its roots. They believed students needed more information about Jews, their religion, identity, and why they, in particular, were chosen as victims. Perhaps, in spite

of the fact that Jews are a focus in this unit, the study of "religion” is underplayed in the readings and materials need to be brought in as a source for understanding the Holocaust and what led up to it. Another teacher believed that the extent to which the background of Germans was

covered in the unit was insufficient. The assumption here is that such an understanding could increase students' ability to explain how the

Holocaust could have happened. On the other hand, all teachers made

the point in the pre-interview that they hoped students would be able

to see parallels between the Holocaust and other examples of inhumanity. By seeing these parallels, students would then recognize that the

Germans are not particularly different from any other group. This objective of making parallels can, however, present a dilemma for teachers; that is, how does one teach the Holocaust as a unique tragedy without forgetting the most important task—that of bringing students to the point where they can perceive such actions and attitudes within 15fc

several historical frameworks? The comments of two teachers in the post-interview implied their recognition of the danger of isolating the Holocaust too much from other examples of inhumanity. To under-

stand why the Holocaust was a creation of the Nazis is not to say they are the only ones capable of such a creation. Thus, it is necessary to know the historical background of Germany if one is to understand the Holocaust phenomena. In a similar vein, two teachers were concerned about the seeming lack of comprehension in the area of individual responsibility. They mentioned that although the materials contained every indication that there were others who collab-

with the Nazis, and that, in fact, orders often came from leaders other than Hitler, some students still found it easier to mouth back: "Hitler did it. It's all his fault."

Finally, on the post-interview, all four teachers expressed some frustration with the time period of seven weeks in which they had to teach the material. (These seven weeks were wedged in between the school's February recess of one week and its spring vacation of one week.) Having previously taught the unit over a period of nine to twelve weeks, they believed that this additional time was necessary to cover the wide range of ideas related to the Holocaust.*

*For some students , the unit extended informally into their spring vacation because the television production by Gerald Green, "The Holo- caust," was presented for four nights, beginning on the Sunday evening following the close of school. CHAPTER VI

IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY

Although several theorists are supportive of interdisciplinary structures of knowledge, few examples of the design, execution, and evaluation of such structures have been carried out. There have been instances of teachers implementing interdisciplinary units, but rarely does an entire school system base its curricular philosophy on this approach, nor do single departments within a school. As a re-

sult it has been difficult for educators to identify the effects on

students of interdisciplinary units and courses.

The purpose this study was to evaluate the changes in know-

ledge and attitudes of ninth grade students who were exposed for a

period of seven weeks to an interdisciplinary curricula dealing with

the Holocaust. In order to evaluate these changes a set of four pro-

blem-oriented questions were designed and two attitude scales were

incorporated on a pre- and post-test. These tests were administered

to l6U students in the experimental group, 72 of whose tests were

used in the evaluation and also to 78 students in a control group of whom 60 were evaluated. Teachers of the Holocaust material were ob-

served and interviewed to determine teacher attitudes toward the mat-

erial, teacher characteristics, and methodologies in teaching the material. The information gained from this study can be used by

teachers and/or administrators in restructuring curricula so that more attempts to integrate the disciplines can be stimulated, thereby providing students with more opportunities to better understand

and possibly solve a wide range of problems using the convergence

155 .

156

approach

In answer to the first research question concerning what students learned as a result of exposure to an interdisciplinary curriculum, the data indicated that students in the experimental group gained substantive knowledge about the Holocaust and to a lesser degree demonstrated an increase in their knowledge of the problem of prejudice. Since scores on the knowledge questions could increase significantly only if a student integrated additional disciplines in his analysis of the problem, it becomes clear that in relation to C.l. (Holocaust) students did demonstrate an increase in their ability to integrate diverse ideas around a single problem. The treatment was effective. Students learned that the causes of the Holo- caust were complex and had political, philosophical, psychological, and still other origins.

The data on Test Questions A (prejudice), B (dilemmas), and C.2. (unrelated issue) indicate that students in the experimental group improved, but not significantly, in their ability to apply concepts and problem-solving approaches to these questions—whereas the control group did not demonstrate any improvement. Change in the stu-

dents ' problem-solving ability as applied to historical and contem-

porary issues was the concern of the second research question. There

are some possible, though not conclusive, explanations for this out-

come. First of all, four different teachers were involved in implementing the unit. As a result, the unit was not uniformly taught.

Students in one class, for example, spent very little time on the concept of prejudice, whereas another class spent so much time on this concept that the instructor had little time left for the latter 157

part of the unit, which dealt with readings meant to help students see parallels between the Holocaust and related historical and contemporary issues. A second possible reason for the less than significant changes might have had to do with the fact that the post- test was given two days prior to spring vacation. Excitement, due to anticipation of this recess, could have acted as a deterrent to the students' serious attention on the post-test. Thirdly, two teachers commented to me that they believed their students were less familiar with the local bypass issue (post-test item) than they were with the dump issue (pre-test item) and as a result might

have refused to deal with that item even speculatively.

Fourthly a , possible reason for little change on three of the

four knowledge questions is the fact that prior to their exposure

to the Holocaust curricula, these students had never taken a course

in which they had tackled an interdisciplinary unit with a problem-

orientation. Their junior high school experience had been a traditional, departmentalized introduction into the disciplines. Social

studies equaled history as author Martin Mayer observed it being taught, that is, as a string of facts, dates, and events. Problem-

solving and inquiry strategies were not used, but, rather, "This is what happened, kids. Learn it." The social studies department chairman acknowledged this fact when asked about the methodology of the Junior high school social studies teachers. It is unlikely that students exposed to an interdisciplinary approach for the duration of this single unit of study, the Holocaust, can acquire or absorb the habits of thinking necessary for integrating ideas from many disciplines around issues and problems. I believe that teachers in 158

all disciplines need to reinforce this approach over and over agein whenever they teach about issues which are best analysed from interdisciplinary perspectives. These ninth grade students were novices in this way of thinking. What is needed, therefore, is curricular reform which would enable students to encounter the interdisciplinary approach every year within at least one of their required courses beginning at the junior high school level. Without a dualistic curriculum, the habit of thinking in a scientific and interdisciplinary way cannot be developed.

Finally a fifth , and possibly the most realistic of the reasons for the less than significant outcomes on three of the four knowledge questions has to do with the fact that students before entering this high school have had little or no experience with open-ended test

questions, that is, questions leaving open to the student much free-

dom to select a wide range of possible answers as well as innovative

and original responses . Had the test items been worded in a more

closed manner to solicit particular and more obvious answers, the out-

comes might have been different. Question A (prejudice), and C.l.

(Holocaust) were open-ended and placed a great deal of responsibility

on the individual student to recall information from the unit and to

create original responses. No assistance was provided to the student by the way the question was worded. Generally, students feel more

comfortable with structured questions that Eire phrased so as to solicit a definite, single set of responses; some students might have become frustrated with the open-ended essay questions.

Answers to the third research question about changes in attitude 159

were provided by the data derived from student responses on two attitude scales, one measuring anti-Semitic attitudes, the other measur ing anti-democratic attitudes.

On the anti-democratic attitude scale, or "Putn c Opinion” scale, students in both groups did not demonstrate any change from pre- to post-test and both groups had nearly identical scores on this scale. These scores were only slightly higher than the neutral score of 1*0 to W and leaned in the direction of anti-democratic attitudes. However, students in the experimental group showed significantly lower scores on the "Opinions on Jews" or anti-Semitic scale than did the control group from pre- to post-test. Lower scores indicated a reduction m anti-Semitism, although neither the control group nor the experimental group scored particularly high on this scale to begin with. Both initially scored approximately four points below the neu-

tral level (62-66 points) indicated for the scale.

It is interesting to note that in spite of exposure to the Holo-

caust material, the experimental group did not demonstrate even a

slight decrease in points on the anti-democratic attitude scale and,

in fact, showed a mean increase of one point from pre- to post-test.

Two observations may help to explain this outcome. First of all, the

experimental group had moderate attitudes to begin with, being only one or two points below the neutral level on the anti-democratic attitudes scale. Secondly, the teachers I observed did not seem to put much emphasis on the totalitarian or anti-democratic aspects of

Naziism, except for its inhumane legal policy of persecuting the Jews

and other minorities . Part of the curriculum includes readings on .

i6o

Nazi Party doctrine and on the activities of the Gestapo (secret police). Nevertheless, there seemed to be little stress on those characteristics of a totalitarian system of government which affect the average citizen, in this case the non-Jewish German. In fact, if anything, some students completed the unit believing that Hitler actually wasn't so bad for those Germans even though he lost the war. Considering the fact that students' anti -democratic attitudes went unchanged, I believe it is necessary to ask this question: Should the way educators teach and the content of the curricula that they teach be consciously developed to transmit democratic values? If the answer is yes —and I believe it should be—then implied here is the need to incorporate this kind of valuing in a structured, though not dogmatic, way.

Kohlberg's answer to this question was discussed in Chapter III, and it involves setting up "just communities," or schools which not only teach courses with democratic principles in mind, but which function administratively with the moral values of justice and equality at their very foundation. Kohlberg's discussion and analysis of dilemmas have a role to play in helping students identify their values and those of others. His strategies may help students see beyond their present stage of moral reasoning to more democratic and moral levels

The data show that students in the experimental group significantly rejected more of the anti-Semitic stereotypes on the post-test than did the control group. However, there is the question of how such scores can be used to predict behavior. There is no way of know- .

161 ing, for example , if students whose scores were lower than neutral on the anti-Semitism scale would, in fact, also reject anti-Semitic behavior. For example, would they refuse to vote for an anti-Semitic political candidate? Kohlberg is one researcher who has argued that his experiments prove there i£ a correlation between attitudes and behaviors. However, this is an area requiring further study and experimentation

Three intervening variables were looked at for their possible effect on outcomes on the attitude scales. These variables were sex, period of the day the class met, and level of the student. Females demonstrated a significantly greater increase in tolerance on the anti-Semitism scale and similarly students meeting in morning classes showed a more significant increase in tolerance than did students meeting in the afternoon. Finally, as to the level of the students, above average students showed a significantly greater gain on the knowledge questions than did the average students, whereas the average students demonstrated a significantly greater gain in tolerance on the anti-Semitism scale.

The fact that females demonstrated a greater change in attitude toward Jews in a pro-Semitic direction is an interesting one and worthy of further study in the area of the relationships of sex to attitudes.

An explanation for why students taking the course in the morning showed greater increase in tolerance than those taking it in the afternoon is that students are generally more receptive to content that comes first or before they have been talked at and simply fatigued by the general routine of an eight-period day. And for apparent reasons of 162

intellect and general ability in the social studies, the level one students demonstrated a greater gain in knowledge than the level two students. But it is interesting to note that the level two student decreased significantly in anti-Semitic attitudes whereas the level one students stayed the same. Education, i.e. the Holocaust curriculum, did influence the average students' attitudes and this fact is an important one for curriculum designers who believe that education plays a role in changing attitudes.

Selznick and Steinberg's data show that at the present time the educational system is the primary countervailing influence leading to the reduction of prejudice. They show how the student population below the high school level are more anti-Semitic than those in high school and that those in college exhibit the least prejudice of all. Since the experimental group that received the Holocaust education showed a significant overall increase in knowledge and increase in tolerance, my evaluative study verifies to some extent their conclusion. A commitment to scientific and democratic values, an understanding of their social implications, cognitive and moral sophisti- cation—These are the ideals not always , the realities of modern education.” 110 These are also the qualities built into interdisciplinary curricula with a problem-orientation.

Obviously, still other factors may have influenced the outcomes of this evaluation but they were not controlled for. In reference to students in the control group these uncontrolled for factors included:

^°Selznick and Steinberg, p. 193. 163

1) their confusion as to why they should take tests that did not relate to „hat they were studying; 2 ) their inexperience and total lack of knowledge of the Holocaust which may have made them feel inadequate , even ignorant, although they were told they were not expected to be knowledgeable in these areas; 3 ) their concern for »y religious background while they responded to the anti-Semitism scale.

For the students in both the experimental and the control groups possible intervening factors included: l) their attitudes towards

social studies and learning in general; 2) their family's attitude toward Jews and other topics contained in the Holocaust unit; 3) their previous encounters with material related to the unit; k) the form and wording of the knowledge questions and attitude statements.

In relation to this last factor, the form and wording of parts

of the instrument, it must be noted that because the attitude scales

had to be used in their published form to insure validity, I was not able to change certain words that I suspected would be difficult for ninth graders. Thus, for example, some of the vocabulary on the anti- Semitic scale proved to be a problem for students who indicated their

frustration by asking what certain words meant. Such words included

justification, innately," "menace," "detriment," and "exaggerated."

(See "Opinions on Jews" scale in Appendix.) Their difficulties in

interpreting these items may have influenced their responses.

As I walked around the room while the control group was taking the pre-test I glanced at the responses they gave on the anti-Semitism scale. Many students were circling "uncertain" and I recall realizing 16U

that these students were not necessarily anti-Semitic, but simply

ignorant about Jews. Some said to me that they hadn't thought enough about Jews to form attitudes about them one way or the other. Ques- tions or comments like these came forward: "Are you Jewish?" "I don't

know any Jews." "I think [so and so] is half Jewish." "What are the Jews like?" Perhaps had more of these students known Jewish peers, the

outcomes on the scale would have been different.

Establishing validity for an attitude scale seems to me to be a most difficult task. After observing the control group as they were

filling out the scale, I recognized the usefulness of the interview process which is frequently carried out by authors of attitude meas-

surements in order to determine the validity of their scales. I believe such interviews with the control group would have given me in-

formation that would help explain their responses. For example, a

series of questions given to determine the students ' exposure to minorities, e.g. Have you ever met any Jews? What was your experience

with them? Describe the encounter briefly . . . This kind of information would add to that produced by the scale responses.

(Measuring attitudes is a common feature of many studies in education; yet there are still many flaws in this type of research, not the least of which are those I just mentioned—vocabulary interpretation, ignorance on the part of students, validity of the scale, and

other problems , I would recommend further research in the areas of attitude formation and measurement.)

Selznick and Steinberg hold that the amount of education a person has directly influences the degree to which he accepts anti-Semitism. 165

Lack of education, they say, is a primary factor of anti-Semitism,

although there are, of course, some well-educated anti-Semites. As this study shows, the education provided by the seven-week unit on the Holocaust did have an effect on the attitudes of those in the experimental group.

A look at the characteristics and methodologies of the four teachers who implemented the unit —the concern of my fourth research

question can also help to explain the results on the knowledge ques-

tions .

All four teachers had been educated in one of the disciplines within the social sciences and their training as teachers was added on to their initial education, except in the case of one teacher.

All of the teachers noted that their preferred style of teaching was the discussion method, which they demonstrated in actions as "teach-

er asking questions, students responding, teacher commenting and/or answering questions." Yet, only one of these teachers had been train-

ed in the methods of how to lead discussions along the inductive lines described by Kohlberg (1972), Beck (l97l)» Oliver and Shaver (1966),

Banks and Clegg (1973), Newman and Oliver (1970), and Hunt and Met-

approaches calf (1968) , educators who have published their structured

for teachers to use in helping students in decision-making and in analyzing historical or contemporary problems in the classroom through

discussion. Inquiry models and discussion strategies furnished by the

authors just mentioned can help students identify their values and

test the assumptions behind a particular value position without first being given answers by teachers impatient for a desired response. 166

With these processes as tools for stimulating moral reasoning vhich requires evidence for one's position, teachers can take students beyond the cognitive level of the material they are dealing with and into the affective or moral domain. In order for students to actually apply knowledge, they must first decide how, when, and why, and such decision-making involves moral decisions. (See Appendix for examples of some "structures" of decision-making and analyses of problems through discussion.) In my frequent visits to the classrooms, I observed only one of the teachers incorporating inquiry approaches. Frequently, the kinds of questions they asked seemed to be answered already in their minds and they simply waited for a student to match

that response. That is not to say that these teachers didn't teach students the scientific method of questioning, hypothesis formation, evidence gathering and conclusion-making. They did carry out this type of instruction, but only in relation to assignments in vhich the student had to vrite a paper on a related topic. However, this method was not used on a day-to-day basis. Three of the four teachers relied on the kind of questioning which required students to repeat the assigned reading material in almost the exact order in which they read it. This type of "check" on the students is made to see if they did their assignment and it has its place in pedagogy. In fact, it may help the student better absorb what (s)he has read. However, this line of questioning must accompany an analysis of problems that are implied—not just those that are explicit— in the material studied if the students are to do any original problem-solving. More importantly, routine questioning alone rarely draws the student into the 167 learning process on a personal level. Students need to engage in research and questioning in order to discover the far-reaching causes and effects of events reported. Junior high and high school students can handle the challenge of inductive reasoning. Teachers might find their students more responsive in class if they demanded more than recall from them. Had these problem-oriented discussion techniques been employed, the changes in knowledge and problem-solving abilities might have been greater, although this must remain an assumption until further research in which these techniques are more systematically isolated and applied to the Holocaust unit.

With these points in mind, I would make certain recommendations to teachers interested in developing and/or evaluating interdisciplinary units. First, teachers preparing to evaluate the teaching and learning of units need to be aware of the level of maturity of the students they are working with and the extent to which they have encountered certain types of questions. Many students have been asked

to do simple research papers that begin with open-ended questions , but

when such items appear on a test , students face quite a different challenge. On a test, the student cannot use the books and the time that are available to him when he does a research paper. He must rely on his own intellect, imagination and recall during a single hour. Tests are also, of course, tension-producing and this tension can act to slow down thought processes. A look at tests that accompany the teacher's manual of the average textbook for grade-school students shows that these tests contain generally short answer types of questions. 168

more closed and more directly linked with one "right" answer As a result, students in many ninth grades have had little opportunity to tackle open-ended test questions. - Teachers must be aware of this fact before preparing items for their evaluative instruments.

Secondly, I recommend to teachers designing interdisciplinary units that they incorporate within their curriculum guides several op-

portunities and suggestions for teachers regarding the use of inductive discussion strategies. By taking students through step-by-step reasoning processes that touch on both the cognitive and affective levels of the material at hand, teachers can help students think for themselves and can guide them to the many diverse perspectives that may illuminate the problems before them. Further, the induction approach might lead students to identifying additional problems. In

some cases, the student may arrive at solutions to problems, but

short of this, he will at least have learned a process of inquiry

and a way of synthesizing diverse ideas. Such strategies require

the student to seek out the appropriate modes of inquiry in solving

or analyzing problems; they require the student to look into not one,

but many fields of knowledge for clues. And in a unit as perplexing

as the Holocaust, students may have to be satisfied with learning a

process of inquiry, because there are few answers possible.

In order for teachers to incorporate these inductive, interdis-

ciplinary approaches , there will be a need for in-service training

or teacher workshops to help instructors see the cognitive maps of

**^Mayer, 1963 . Frances FitzGerald, "Rewriting American History,"

The New Yorker (March 12, 1979) » ^8-106. 169

disciplines outside of , . . . theireir own.nvr, SuchQ training would improve the performance of teachers in any discipline. However, if such training is not possible, teachers can, nevertheless, improve their handling of discussions by studying and applying Kohlberg, Oliver and Shaver, and others who provide steps that are readily available. Ninth grade or perhaps even seventh or eighth grade is the place to begin the dualistic curricular approach, before students are buried under layers of fragmented thinking and solidified values. Ibe minds of fourteen-year-old students are still relatively open to the natural integration of ideas. Specialization or departmentalization usually begins in junior high school, and is, in part, a result of the assumption of schools that the code of anything has to precede its application, use, and creative extension. For example, the student

must decode biology-that is learn , its classification system-before he is allowed to discover biological truths for himself in the laboratory. "Translated into curriculum requirements, these seemingly obvious but actually erroneous ideas force the learner into a dozen or so years of passive acceptance of doctrinnaire fact. By the time

the process is complete even the brightest learners find their cur- ."^ 2 iosity dulled . .

Many psychologists believe that once a student is in high school

his attitudes are clearly formed. If this belief is proven to be true,

the implications for curricular change are tremendous. The need for

curricula with a problem-orientation may provide students with one of

1;2 L. Craig Wilson, The Open Access Curriculum (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972), 93. 170

their few chancee for dealing with a wide range of attitudes. What is needed is the kind of education that develops an intellectual commit-

ment to rules of evidence, as well as an awareness of democratic principles based not simply on conformity to specific norms or prohibitions, but on moral reasoning.

We make an offer to students of subjects, not of problems. If we ever come round to presenting them with genuine human problems, questions of what humanity should be trying to do, it is by way of subjects and an attempt to demonstrate the relevance of these subjects. Approaching it from that angle the problems are cut and dried before ve start we only tackle problems which we think the subject has already solved and those aren’t problems at all." 1^

Interdisciplinary curricula with a problem-orientation can do what no present system of instruction aims to do —let the learner explore a wide range of problems without setting boundaries around the kinds of questions, data, and modes of inquiry available to him.

The usefulness of the structures of knowledge in our high schools today is rarely questioned. "The relationships of biology, for example, to chemistry, physics, and the highly-promising new fields such as genetics, geo-physics, aerospace medicine, is simply not a point of issue. Time-honored disciplines are the rule. Separate courses make up the curriculum and interrelationships are accidental. There are few schools, secondary or college level, which open up the disciplinary

^3Sdwin Mason, Collaborative Learning (New York: Agathon Press,

1972 ), 95 .

^^Wilson, Open Access , U. .

171

order to speculation by the students. My review of the literature revealed few opportunities for students to work in an interdisciplinary or speculative way. That is not to say that there is no rationale for the disciplinary tradition. I would not propose eliminating present educational programs based on this tradition, but rather would ask those critical of interdisciplinary structures to recognize the validity of and need for these programs becoming an equally intrinsic part of high school curricula. A new educational priority must be the use of knowledge for the welfare and advancement of mankind by dealing with problems in a scientific way. These problems can then serve as the organizing principle for the many

fields of scholarly inquiry.

Interdisciplinary curricula too must be characterized by theory, methods, and standards, and can be so structured. (See Appendix for comparison between traditional and alternative curriculum designs.)

Courses with a problem-orientation must be taught alongside, or within, the traditional., discipline-based requirements, some of which, necessarily, would be decreased, but the disciplines would still be the areas in which the student digs for ideas in the solution of problems

Minimal graduation requirements in interdisciplinary studies should be established for students just as they are in traditional subject areas. Short of a separate department, the convergence concept can be adapted in many ways within the traditional departmental structures; that is, such units can be incorporated into existing social studies, science, English, or art departments with- 172

out the need for new sets of books, tees, teaching, or even new courses. In beginning to interdisciplinize on the "unit" level— the level which deals with a planned set of activities unified by and focused on a limited number of problems—any teacher can accomplish the goal of interdisciplinizing his or her course. The Holocaust unit is only one example of how an interdisciplinary unit was incorporated within a year-long history course.

In spite of the ease with which the discipline-oriented teachers can incorporate interdisciplinary units in their classrooms,

change is not always so simple. As Kuhn points out in relation to the field of science, change is gradual; old paradigms or models or theories are only slowly reconsidered. As in the area of science,

the area of secondary education curriculum development is full of

specialists with vested interests who need more than a theoretic

"base to convince them of the importance of alternative paradigms or models for structuring knowledge. Kuhn points out that when a sci-

entific community repudiates a past paradigm, it also must renounce as a fit subject for professional scrutiny most of the books and articles in which that paradigm has been embodied. ^ So, too, with the acceptance of interdisciplinary studies, texts with a focus on only one discipline are insufficient for the investigation of problems and issues which are cross-disciplinary in nature.

Specialists in education—like practitioners of science —will not repudiate a paradigm and adopt a new one except after long-term debate, experimentation, and research indicating that the "old"

^Kuhn, 166. ,

173

paradigm can no longer help them solve the problems they have set for themselves. One of the problems of curriculum designers has been to organize knowledge so that it conveys meaning to students and trans- mits useful knowledge they can apply in their efforts to better understand their world and themselves. But according to the great number

of students who echo the words of the girl quoted at the outset of this study, the "old" curricular paradigm based on single-subject disciplines is not solving their educational problem. When curricula does not exist which can help learners deal with the real problems of their complex society, then education is surely in a crisis state. Kuhn sees the development of science as the transition from one para-

digm to another via scientific revolutions which result from crises

which are brought about when a paradigm proves—over and over again——

to be useless in the practice of science. ^6 In the case of curricu-

lum design the paradigm of the disciplinary structure of knowledge

is not a useless one, certainly, but it is deficient as long as it

lacks some provision for the conveyence of ever-increasing knowledge

around the pressing problems and inquiries of man. This study was

designed to discover the effects of a particular example of this

curriculum design. Educators clinging to the "old" paradigm must

listen to the cries for relevance and coherence from their students

as well as to society’s cry for solutions to its crucial problems.

Whose job is it to construct these new interdisciplines so as to make them distinctive, theoretical, self-correcting, and internally

^Kuhn, 12. directing? According to Belth, it is the educators involved in the discipline of education who must be concerned about the models by vhich knowledge is organized, transmitted, and extended. Their focus must be on the curriculum-science, art, history, for example-not as the historian or scientist sees it, but rather as it is viewed by one interested in the structures of our knowledge. It is the job of educators to ask, "How are the models of a discipline altered and new ones created? Issues of curricula, insofar as they are genuine, are ultimately issues of society. Change of curricula implies social action vis a vis educational social policy. Herein lies the importance of

providing for 1 interdisciplinarity a philosophic justification. * 8 Of one thing we can be sure: we are not going to best serve our society and schools solely through specialization. Specialization we must have, of course, and its major, professional importance in push- ing forward the frontiers of knowledge does not require justification.

But most modern social problems cut across traditional disciplines.

Causes, effects, anc lutions are to be discovered only through the probing of different academic specialties. Thus, the interdisciplinary approach is basic. The convergence concept of this approach also offers one avenue toward enriching the relationships among traditional disciplines and toward helping students see the role of values in all scholarly inquiry. The challenge now lies in making this collaboration between traditional programming and interdisciplinary studies a reality.

1*7 Belth, vi 1 .

1*8 Radest in Hook, 233. .

BIBLIOGRAPHY Ackoff, Russell, Redesigning the Future. al Problems Systems Approach to Societ- New York: Wiley, 1975.

Adler , Richard R. , e d. Humanities Pro grams Today . New Press, 1970. York: Citation

Adorno^T^W^ Auth°rltarl ^ »" Personality. New York: Harper . ^1950 .

the HlKh gSlBSOgrleifla. New York:

Allport, Gordon. The Nature of Prejudice . New York: Doubleday, 1958. Arnheim, Rudolph. |lsUal Thinking ^ . California: University of Califor-

Arnone, Vincent C. "The Nature of Concepts: A Point of View." Theory into Practice x (April 1971): 101-108.

Banks James A., and Clegg, Amhrosea. Teaching Strategies for the Soc- lal Studies. Reading, Mass.: * Addison-Wesley , 1973. Beck, C. M. Crittenden, , B. S. 2nd; Sullivan, E. V. eds. Moral Educa- °n? Interdiscipli — nary Approaches . Toronto : University of Tor- onto Press, 1971.

Bellack Arno A. , History of Curriculum: Thought and Practice." Review of Educational Research 39 (June 1969): 283-292.

Belth Marc . , Education as a Discipline; a Study of the Role of Models in Thinking . New York: Allyn, 1965.

Black, Max. Models and Metaphors . Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1962.

Bloom, R. B. "Science, Humanities , and Society." NASSP Bulletin 57 (February, 1973): 50-57.

Broudy , Harry S., Building a Philosophy of Education . Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1961. -"On Knowing With." Proceedings of the Philosophy of Educa-

tion Society . Studies in Philosophy and Education, South- ern Illinois University (1970): 89-103. - The Real World of the Public Schools . New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1972, Ch. 7. -Smith, B. Othanel; and Burnett, Joe R. Democracy and Excel-

lence in American Secondary Education . Chicago: Rand McNal- ly, 1964.

175 )

176

Brownell, William S. "Problem Solving »" The Psychology of Learning . Ulst Yearbook, Part II, Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education, 1942.

Bruner, Jerome S. "The Art of Discovery," Harvard Educational Re- view 31 (Winter 1961). The Process of Education . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1963. " c rd a Theory of ggy _ Instruction . Cambridge: Harvard Press -957. Carbone, Jr. Peter F. "Reflections on Moral Education," The Record 71 4 (May 1970): 598-607.

Chalmers, F. Graeme. "A Cultural Foundation for Education," Art Edu- cation 27 (January 1974): 21-25.

Chartock, Roselle. "A Holocaust Unit for Classroom Teachers." Social Education 1+2 (April 1978): 287-285. - "Survey of Attitudes and Trends in the Field of Interdis- ciplinary Education." University of Massachusetts, 1975. (Typewritten. - "Teaching About the Holocaust." Today's Education 68 ( February-March 1979): 34-37. - and Spencer, Jack, eds. The Holocaust Years: Society

on Trial . New York: Bantam Books and The Anti-Defama- tion League, 1978.

Chase, Mary Ellen: Jewett, Arno; and Evans, William. Values in Lit-

erature . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1965.

Chelminski , Rudolph. "West Germans Screw up Courage to Show Nazi Art." Smithsonian (February 1975).

Cohen, R. D. "Unwarranted Assumptions in our Innovative Science Cur- ricula." Science Education 56 (April 1972): 179-187.

Cole, Stephen. The Sociological Method . Chicago: Rand McNally and

Co. , 1976.

Coles, Robert. "What About Moral Sensibility?" Today's Education (September-October 1977): 40-42.

Collins, E. L. "Art Education and the Rapidly Changing World."

Art Education . 24 (November 1971): 7-11.

and Cook, David R. A Guide to Educational Research . Boston: Allyn Bacon, Inc., 1965.

Cook, Desmond L. Program Evaluation and Review Technique: Applica- S. of tions in Education . Washington, D. C.: U. Department Health, Education and Welfare, 1966. . "

177

Con” e '^cordis (^1“ Teacher College

" CUrr e ent ' Yesterday and Today -'' Social (JM™r^ l9T5r Education 39

DesPres, ^Terrence . The Survivors. New York: Oxford University Press,

Pewey^JohiK pemocracy and ^ Education . New York: The Macmillan Com- “ ov Think. - Boston: D. C. Heath and Co., 1910 ' Human Nature and Conduct . New York: Random House*, 1950. ~ Moral Principles in Education . New York: Philosophical Library, 1959.

Duffey, Robert V. "Moral Education and the Study of Current Events." Social Education 39 (January 1975): 33-35.

Durkheim, Emile. Moral Education . New York: Free Press, 196l). Duvall, Alice; Durkin, Mary C.; and Leffler, Katharine C. The Taba Social Studies Curriculum: Grade 5 - United States and Canada - Societies in Transition. Menlo Park: Addison-Wesley , 1969.

Edwards, A. L. "Unlabelled Fascist Attitudes." Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology 36 (19I+I): 575-582.

Eisner, Elliot W., ed. Confronting Curriculum Reform . Boston: Little,

Brown , and Co . , 1971

Eisner, Elliot W. "Emerging Models for Educational Evaluation. School Review (August 1972 ).

Etzioni , Amitai. "Can Schools Teach Kids Values?" Today’s Education (September-October 1977): 29-1+2. - Edward W. Lehman. "Some Dangers in ’Valid* Social Measure- ment . " The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 373 (September 1967).

Ezer, Melvin. "Value Teaching in the Middle and Upper Grades: A Ration- ale for Teaching but not Transmitting Values." Social Education 31 (January 1967): 39-^0.

Fenton, Edwin. The New Social Studies . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 19^7^

Fethe, Charles B. "A Philosophical Model for Interdisciplinary Pro- grams," Liberal Education 59 (December 1973): 1+90-1+97. 178

Education J and the Commonwealth: Observations £hi Delta Kappan (September , 1973): 10-12, 89 . ! "”surviva?\. P OE Pectu= f° r a Really Relevant University." Harper s fe f * (September 1969 ): 12-22.

Fletcher, Joseph. oral Responsib jj ility: Situation Ethics at. Work. Philadelphia: ' Westminster Press, 1967 .

Frankl, Viktor W. Man’s Search for Meaning . New York: Pocket Books, 1976.

Friedlander, Henry in "The Holocaust: Three Views.” ADL Bulletin (November 1977): 1 . " On the Holocaust: A Critique of the Treatment of the Holocaust in History Textbooks. New York: Anti-Defam^. ation League, I 97L.

Fromm, Erich. Escape from Freedom . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1941 .

Gadsden, Jr. Thomas. "Cutting Boundaries with Correlated Science." School Science and Mathematics - 75 (January 1975 ): 80 86 .

Gagne, R. M. The Conditioning of Learning . New York: Holt, Rine-

hart and Winston, 1965 .

Galbraith, Ronald E. and Jones, Thomas M. "Teaching Strategies for Moral Dilemmas, An Application of Kohlberg's Theory of Moral Development to the Social Studies Classroom.” Social Education 39 (January 1975): 16-22.

Getzels, J. W. and Csikszenthmihalyi , M. The Creative Vision: A Long-

itudinal Study of Problem-Finding in Art . New York: Wiley, 197b.

Glass, Gene V. The Growth of Evaluation Methodology . American Edu- cational Research Association Monograph Series on Curriculum Evaluation, Chicago: Rand McNally, 1970.

Glock, Charles, ed. Survey Research in the Social Sciences . New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 19^7*

Goodlad, John. The Changing School Curriculum . New York: Fund for the Advancement of Education, 1966.

Grobman, Hulda. Evaluation Activities of Curriculum Projects: A Start-

ing Point . AERA Monograph Series on Curriculum Evaluation, no. 2,

Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1968 .

Gronlund, Norman E. Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching . New Jer- sey: Macmillan, 1976. ,

Gustafson,^J.^etal l Education ggg, . Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Uni- ;

Guttman, Louis. "A Basis for Scaling Qualitative Data.” Sociological American Review 9. Haas , John D. "For Lack of a Loom: Problems in Integrating Knowledge. School Science and Mathematics 75 (January 1975): I4-1U.

Halvorsen, R. E. "Art: An Antidote to Harmful Forces." Art Educa- tion 2h (June 1971): 12-15.

Hillway Tyrus ed. , , Handbook of Educational Research. New York* Hought ' ~ on-Mifflin , 1969.

Harmin, Merrill, Howard Kirschenbaum and Sidney Simon, Clarifying Values Through Subject Matter: Applications for th7~Classroom (Minneapolis: Winston Press, 1973).

Heath, R., ed. New Curricula . New York: Harper and Row, I96U.

Hemphill, John K. "The Relationships Between Research and Evalua- tion Studies." Educational Evaluation, New Roles, New Means . 67th Yearbook, Part II of the National Society for the Study of Education (1969).

Hilberg, Raul. The Destruction of the European Jews . Chicago: Quadrangle, 196l.

Hillway, Tyrus, ed. Handbook of Educational Research . New York: Houghton-Mifflin, 1969.

Holton, Gerald. "The Roots of Complementarity." Daedalus (Fall 1970): 1015-1055.

Hook, Sidney; Kurtz, Paul; and Todorovich, Miro. The Philosophy .

of the Curriculum: The Need for General Education . Buffalo N.Y.: Prometheus Books, 1975.

Hunt, D. "Education for Interdisciplinary Understanding." Behav- ioral and Social Science Teacher 1 (February 1973): 7^.

Hunt, Maurice and Metcalf, Lawrence E. Teaching High School Soc-

ial Studies: Second Edition . New York: Harper and Row, 1968.

Hurd, P. D. "Emerging Perspectives in Science Teaching for the 1970's." School Science and Mathematics 75 (December 1972): 765-772.

"Interdisciplinary Scholarship." Peabody Journal of Education U8 (October 1970). •

l8o

J° hnS 01087 f Sch ° °01 T "arMn «- « »«« Wiley and So^.^gT^ Jones, Ron. No Substitute for Madness . Nev York: Zephyros, 1976. Kahn, Robert L. and Cannell, Charles F. The Dynamics of Intervi ew- in&. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1957.

Klausmeier, Herbert J. and Ripple, Richard E. Learning and Hnman Abilities: Educatr onal Psychology . 3rd Ed. , Nev York: Harper ana now, 1971

Knopp Dr. Josephine, ed. Transcript of the Second Philadelphia Conference on the Holocaust, "Humanizing America: A Post- Holocaust Imperative," (Philadelphia: National Institute on the Holocaust at Temple University, 1977).

Kohlberg Lawrence. , "The Child as a Moral Philosopher." Psychol- ogy Today 7 (September 1968): 25-30.

-"A Cognitive-Developmental Approach to Moral Education." The Human- ist 32 (1972): 13-16. - "Moral Development and the New Social Studies." Social Education 37 (May 1973): 369-375. - "Stages of Moral Development as a Basis for Moral Edu- cation." Chapter I, (1972): 23-92. (Mimeographed).

Selman, Robert T. Preparing School Personnel Relative to Values : A Look at Moral Education in the Schools . Eric Clearinghouse on Teacher Education: Washington, D.C., January, 1972.

Kuhn, D. J. "Science Education in a Changing Society." Science Education 56 (July 1972): 395-^02.

Kuhn, Thomas. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions . Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.

Kurtines , W. and Grief, E. G. "The Development of Moral Thought: Review and Evaluation of Kohlberg* s Approach." Psychological Bulletin 8l (August 197*0: **53-*+70.

Ladenburg, Muriel. "Teaching Right from Wrong." The Massachusetts Teacher (November 1977): 23-25.

Lang, Daniel. "A Reporter in Germany: A Backward Look." The New Yorker (October 3, 1977): U7-107.

Layton, David. "Science as General Education." Trends in Educa- tion 25 (January 1972): 13-15*

Leeper, Robert R., ed. Strategies for Curriculum Change . Washing- ton, D.C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Develop-

ment, 1965 . l8l

and ^tlOMl Chicago: - t^Teachina. Chicago: Scott-

Levine , Charles . "Role-Taking Standpoint and Adolescent Usage of Kohlberg s Conventional Stages of Moral Reasoning." Journal f Personality and _ Social Psychology 34 (1976): Ul— U6~ Llker " n3is * A Technique for the A* ^? Measurement of Attitudes." Archives of Psychology l4o (1932). Lippmann , Walter. The Public Philosophy . Nev York: The Nev Amer- lean Library, 1956.

Littell, Franklin H. Transcript of an address at the Third Phila- delphia Conference on Teaching the Holocaust, "The Holocaust and the Corruption of Science." (November 18, 1977).

Locke, John. Two Treatises on Government . Excerpt in Chartock and Spencer, Society on Trial .

Lomon Earle L. > Beck, B.; and Arbetter, C. "Real Problem Solving in USMES: Interdisciplinary Education and Much More." School Science and Mathematics 75 (January 1975): 53-64.

Lutz, F. E. and Iannaccone, L. Understanding Educational Organi- zations . Columbus, Ohio: Merrill, 1969.

McCall, C. J. and Simmons, L. L. Issues in Participant Observa- tion » Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley , 1969.

Maccoby, Michael. "Toward a Moral Education." Independent School (May 1977): 10-14.

MacDonald, James B. "Curriculum Theory." Journal of Educational Research 64 (January 1971): 196.

Machiavelli , Niccolo. The Prince. Excerpt in Chartock and Spencer, Society on Trial.

Martorella, Peter M. "Curricular Changes: A Paradigm for Analyzing the Parameters of Curricular Reform." Educational Technology (December 1971): 23-26.

Mason, Edwin. Collaborative Learning . New York: Agathon Press, Inc., 1972.

Mason, R. E. Moral Values and Secular Education . New York: Colum- bus University Press, 1950. 182

Massialas, Byron G. and Cox, Benjamin C. Inquiry in th e Social Studies . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1966 .

Mayer, ^ Mart in. Where, When _ and Why, Social Studies in American Schools . New York: Harper and Row, 1963 . Melt zer Milton. , Never to Forget: The Jews of the Holocaust. New York: Harper and Row, 1976 .

Merton, Robert K. and Devereaux, Edward C., Jr. "Practical Pro- blems and the Uses of Social Science." Transaction 1 (July 1964).

Milgram, Stanley. Obedience to Authority: An Experimental View.* New York: Harper ~ “ and Row, 1969 .

Mischel , T., ed. Genetic Epistemology . New York: Academic Press,

Moffett, James. A Student-Centered Language Arts Curriculum. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co., 1973.

"Moral Education." Newsweek (March 1, 1976): 74-75.

Morse, Arthur D. While~Six Million Died. New York: Random House. 1968 .

Newman, Fred M. and Oliver, Donald W. Clarifying Public Contro- versy: An Approach to Teaching Social Studies . Boston: Little, Brown, 1970.

New York City Board of Education. The Holocaust: A Study of Geno- cide . New York: New York City Board of Education, 1977.

Oliver, Donald and Shaver, Jampes P. Teaching Public Issues in the

High School . Boston: Houghton Mifflin, Inc., 1966 .

Oppenheim, A. N. Questionnaire Design and Attitude Measurement .

New York: Basic Books, Inc. Publishers, 1966 .

Orwell, George. 1984 . New York: New American Library, 1971*

Papp, Joseph. "Letter to the Editor." New York Times , April 30, 1978, p. 29. (Arts and Leisure Section)

Pauli, William J. "Confusion and Problem Solving." The Clearing House (October i960 ): 79-82.

Peters, Richard S., ed. Concept of Education . New York: Humani-

ties Press, 1967 * 183

Petr1 1 ,,Do *° *,’ s .’ u See «hat I See? “V ? The Epistemology of Inter InqUiry '" Edueattoty^ese^eher 1976): 9!^ 5 (February' * "Tha Believing in Seeing.” in Lindley , J. stiles ed Theories for Teaching Nev York: Dodd-Mead! i9 7u! Phenix Philip H. Education and the Common Good. A Moral Phlie. R ealms of Meaning . New York: McGraw-Hill, I96U. Philadelphia Board of Education. The Holocaust: A TWw Resource ~ hiladelphia : Board of Education , 1976. Piaget, Jean. Judgement and Reasoning i n the Chinn. w„„ v^y. K * Harcourt Brace, 1928. — ~ he Construction ^ of Reality in the Chil—d. New York- Basic Books, I95U . “ The Moral Judgement of the Child . New York: Free Press,

Raman, V. V. "Science and Relevance." Journal of General Educa- tion 24 (July 1972): 93-102.

Raths^, Louis; Harmin , Merrill; and Simon, B. Sidney. Values and Teaching: Working With Values in the Classroom. Columbus. Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1966.

Ravitch, Diane. "Moral Education and the Schools." Commentary 56 (September 1973): 62-66.

Rhodes, Anthony. The Art of Persuasion: World War II . Chelsea House, 70 West 40th Street, New York.

Richter, Hans Peter. Friedrich . New York: Dell, 1977. - I Was There . New York: Dell, 1973.

Romey, W. D. "Transdisciplinary Problem-Centered Studies: Who is the Integrator?" School Science and Mathematics 75 (January 1975): 30-38.

Rosenshine, Barak. "Evaluation of Classroom Instruction." Review of Educational Research 40 (1970).

Scheffler, Israel. Science and Subjectivity . New York: Bobbs-Mer-

rill , 1967.

Schilpp, Paul A., ed. The Philosophy of John Dewey , vol. 1, Evans- ton, 111.: Northwestern University, 1939*

Scholl , Inge . Students Against Tyranny: The Resistance of the White

Rose, Munich, 1942-1943 . Middletown: Wesleyan University Press, 1970. . .

18U

Schulweis, Harold. The Holocaust Dybbuk." Moment (February 36-1+2. i 9T6) ;

ShaW ’Sn NV^f^a^; Smith Kenneth and DIBacco, John. "The Multidisciplinary Training Pr° '" blemS Journal of School P.

^^N^’York;

Stake, Robert E. "Testing in the Evaluation of Curriculum Develop- ment * Review of Educational Research 38 (1968). Stlle " NeW Front ie s in Teacher Education." Journal 01!; Educational . T Research 6j (November 1973): 123-136.

Strom Margot Stern. "Facing History and Ourselves: The Study of the Holocaust and Human Behavior." Media and Methods (May /June 1978):

and Parsons, William S. Facing History and Ourselves : —Study of the Holocaust and Human Behavior . Curric- ulum Guide, Brookline, Massachusetts: Brookline School Department, 1976.

Stratemeyer, Florence B. et al. Developing a Curriculum for Modern Living . New York: Teachers College, Columbia, 1963.

Suhl, Yuri. Uncle Misha 's Partisans . New York: Four Winds Press, 1973. V

Thorndike, Robert L. and Hagen, Elizabeth. Measurement and Evalua— tion in Psychology and Education . (2nd ed.) New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1961.

Thur stone, L. L. and Chave, E. J. The Measurement of Attitudes. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1929

"Towards a Definition of Interdisciplinary Studies." Vestes 17 (August 197*0.

Travers, Robert M. An Introduction to Educational Research . (2nd ed.)

New York: Macmillan , 196*+ .

185

August-Septeraber , 1975. Gagne, R. M. ; uation.

Van Til, William, ed. Houghton-Mifflin, 1971.

Vars, Gordon F. "Curriculum in Secondary Schools and Colleges." in James R. Quire, Ed. A Nev Look at Progressi ve Education. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Year- Book. 1972.

Volavkova, H., ed. I Never Say A Butterfly . Nev York: McGraw- Hill, I96U.

Wallen, Norman E. and Travers, Robert M. W. "Analysis and Inves- tigation of Teaching Methods." in N. L. Gage, Ed. Handbook of Research on Teaching . Chicago: Rand McNally and Co., 1963.

Wasserman, Elsa R. "Implementing Kohlberg's 'Just Community Concept' in an Alternative High School." Social Education (April 1976): 203-207.

Weinrich, Max. Hitler's Professors . New York: YIVO, 191*6.

Weiss, Carol N. "Planning and Action Project Evaluation." in June

Schmelzer (ed.) Learning in Action . Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1966.

Welch, Wayne W. "Curriculum Evaluation." Review of Educational Re- search 39 (1969)-.

Wiesel, Elie. Night . New York: Avon, 1972. - "Trivializing the Holocaust: Semi-Fact and Semi-Fiction."

New York Times , April l6, 1978, p. 1, 29 (Arts and Leisure Section)

Wilson, John. Moral Education and the Curriculum . New York: Perga- mon Press, 1969.

Wilson, L. Craig. The Open Access Curriculum . Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1972.

Winthrop, Henry. "Interdisciplinary Studies: Variations in Meaning, Objectives, and Accomplishments." APE Bulletin 33 (May 1972): 29-1*1.

Wittgenstein, L. Philosophical Investigations . New York: Macmillan, 1958. 186

Woodruff, A. D. and DiVest a, F. J. "The Concepts Relationship between Values, and Attitudes." Educational and Psychological Measure- Sent. 8 (191+8): 6U5-659. appendix appendix a

Oro3ffiing_Disciplines According to Six Realms nr

Philip Phenix outlines six realms or patterns of meaning each inclusive of several disciplines. He discusses the four aspects of each discipline which demonstrates the basis for their location in a particular realm: 1) the general logical charac-

ter of the discipline, its 2) subject matter, 3) its representa-

tive concepts, and U) its methods of inquiry. He assigns the disciplines to the following six classes of meaning "indicating the general kinds of understanding a person must have if he is to function well:" 1

1. Symbolics: expressing and communi eating a. the disciplines of ordinary language b. mathematics c. non—discursive symbolic forms such as rituals 2. Empirics: describing a. physical, sciences b. psychology c. biology d. social sciences 3. Esthetics: making and perceiving significant objects a. music b. visual arts c. arts of movement d. literature b. Synnoetics: entering into relations or direct awareness or general personal knowledge 5. Ethics: deciding between right and wrong — moral knowledge 6. Synoptics: comprehending integrally a. history b. religion c. philosophy

While offering a strong rationale for these six realms,

Phenix also implies how artificial are the barriers that exist

1 Phenix, Realms of Meaning , 29. 188 189

among the disciplines as they are organized in the secondary

school. For example, while he points out what is unique about the mode of inquiry in the physical sciences, he also points out how similar it is to that of the social sciences. Both are discussed within his realm of empirics, but are always placed in distinct and separate departments in high schools today and are rarely, if ever, related.

Says Phenix: "From the principle that the content of curriculum shall come entirely from the disciplines, it is not to be concluded that the materials of instruction ought necessarily to be organized into separate courses each of which pertains to one of the disciplines. The discipline principle is not an argument for a departmentalized curriculum in the . . . schools.

It is possible to use knowledge from the disciplines in connec- tion with studies that cut across several disciplines." 2

2 Ibid., p. 319. 190

APPENDIX b

article on TEACHING the HOLOCAUST: methodology

A Holocaust Unit for Classroom

“Night and Fog”

The teacher drew the curtain across the window. The classroom darkened. A student turned on the mo- tion picture projector. On the screen in full color appeared a pastoral scene of waving grasses and wild flowers; then brown, barrack-like buildings in row after row behind barbed wired fences. The brown buildings looI(ed strangely tended but uninhabited and still. The students of the ninth-grade social studies class were puzzled. They looked around at each other and at the teacher, then back at the screen. Color turned to stark black-and-white scenes struggling people, being crushed into railroad cattle c .rs . . . naked men and women with heads shaven . gaunt, .. . hollow-eyed faces staring through barbed wire . . . showers that spewed gas . . . ovens full of ashes and human bones . . . piled-high bodies being bulldozed into open pits, spilling into them with arms and legs flailing like dolls’ limbs . . . Some shocked students momentarily averted their eyes from the screen. With each fresh horror, whispered exclamations of disbelief filled the classroom “Gross!” “This can’t be real!” ' ’x. “You’ve got to be kidding!” Close-ups of baskets and pails into which human remains had been neatly sorted—eyeglasses, gold fillings from teeth, bones, skin, hair . . . “Oh, God,” groaned several students. “I can’t believe it,” whispered others.

Two girls held their stomachs as if ill with incipient nausea. The students had not been prepared for what they were seeing. There was no way to prepare them. Al- most all had no knowledge of the events they were watching, knowing little or nothing of the origins of World War 11, of Germany under Adolph Hitler, or of the systematic extermination by the Nazis of six mil-

*Reprinted vith permission of the National Council for the Social Studies, Daniel Roselle, editor. Roselle Chartock, "A Holocaust Unit for Classroom Teachers," Social Education, April, 1978 , pp. 278-285. lion Jews and millions of non-Jews. Some of the shocked exclamations of the students revealed their ignorance and disorientation. “Who are these people?” several asked at different points in the film of the living dead and the remains of the dead. Except for one or two students, they had no idea whatsoever. The purpose of using the film was to introduce them to this period in history in as dramatic and interesting and as authentic a way as possible. The name of the film is “Night and Fog,” and it incorporates film footage that had been taken by the Nazis of their own systematic extermination operations in such concentration camps as Auschwitz. “Night and Fog” is French- produced and the sound track narration is in French, translated by English subtitles on the screen. The impact of the film on the students, of course, w is almost entirely visual. Although students are ac- omed to seeing much violence on television and in ertainment feature films, “Night and Fog” had a documentary authenticity that was shocking beyond anything they had ever experienced before. And the question many kept uttering throughout the film was “Why?” “Why?” "Why?” And, of course, “Why?” is a very natural question in addressing any subject. “Night and Fog” is thirty-three minutes in length, and when it ended and the lights were turned on, most of the students appeared quite dazed and unable to move. Some virtually jumped when the change-of-period bell sounded. The teacher suggested to the students as they were leaving the classroom that they write down some of their feelings. Writing down thoughts after watching a film—especially one with emotional content—is often a way of relieving some of the tension and confusion brought on by the experience. Sometimes it can help students organize their thoughts; and it may help them place key images in their proper context. Often the ideas in a film—or in a book—are not fully digested until we deal with them in writing. On the second day of the unit, the students had an opportunity to discuss their feelings and to ask questions. “Who were the dead? Had they tried to escape?” “Who were the murderers? How could they?” “Why were they killed?” These were the questions which would be answered through the students’ own investigations over the next —

twelve weeks, during which time they would be able to read a text compiled of nearly one hundred excerpts from books related to the Holocaust. Only two of the students had ever heard the term Holocaust, which has come to refer to Hitler’s obliter- ation of six million Jews, one third of world Jewry; and which the dictionary defines as “the complete destruction of people or animals by fire; a burnt offering.’’ It appeared from their initial discussion that “Night and Fog’’ had evoked many emotions in the students. Some of their comments, for example, reflected disbelief. “Were those bodies real or were they made out of papier mache or rubber? The Nazis handled them as if they were trash.”

Another student remarked about how incredible it was to her that the Nazis looked “so businesslike even proud” about what they were doing. Many found the film impossible to believe. But when they were told that the Nazis themselves took much of the footage, they were finally convinced that the Holocaust had been a reality. At first, they could not see why the Nazis would want to film such atroci- ties, but through discussion and later readings they came to the understanding that these activities were seen simply as the means to an end: the restored great- ness of their nation, promised by Hitler; and the Nazis were proud of this organized and methodical operation that would lead them to this end. Students’ responses to the film also reflected their fear:

“I don’t think I would want to visit those camps. That’s what I’ve always wanted to do—visit Ausch- witz. I’d be so paranoid now, I'd think that as soon as I got inside the gates, they would be shut and I d be trapped. I’d be destroyed and crossed oflfthe big books just like the Jews; and that would be the end of me like

I had never existed.” near Still other students reacted with intense anger— fury: What “I felt like yelling out loud, ‘How could you? kind of men are you to kill so violently and so freely?’ 1 hated the murderers.” and stu- The film had a strong emotional impact, past dents gained important insights into events of the and their relationship to these events. “Hitler seemed to round up and exterminate the they Jews with such unbelievable speed and force that reminded me of didn’t even have a chance to rebel. It this big wave coming at me and how I felt when I saw under.” before I knew it, 1 was swept showed several One of the last scenes in the film Nuremberg Trials. Nazis sitting as defendants at the —

They had been charged by the Allies with “crimes against humanity.” As they were questioned about their role in the macabre events of the Holocaust, they each responded—and the subtitles flashed — their words across the bottom of the screen “I was not responsible; 1 was only following orders.” Several students saw parallels between this trial and Lt. Calley’s in America not too many years ago, in which Calley was convicted, then paroled, for the slaughter of innocent villagers in My Lai during the Vietnam War. “I think they were all responsible, from Hitler on down to the man who turned the gas switch,” said one girl, referring to the defendants she had seen on the screen.

Every student had something to say about the film even those who usually sat silently in class. This is something of a phenomenon in a ninth-grade social studies class, where usually only a minority of students speak up. The discussion of the film continued for the rest of the period on the second day and students referred to it continuously during the rest of the unit. This is one of the best reasons for showing such a film at the beginning of the unit. Having the images to refer back to helped the students deal with ideas contained in the reading materials.

Readings Now that “Night and Fog” had aroused the students’ curiosity, they anxiously looked for answers to their questions in the text of readings and individual paperbacks available in the classroom. There were full sets of some books and single copies of others on the shelves. Getting students to read books is a common problem many teachers face. Students generally don’t like to read. Whether it is because of the attraction of television or simply other kinds of leisure activities is not always clear. Yet, in spite of this fact, the ideas and authenticity of the film led them to seek out the ideas on these shelves. The first book students would read was Night by Elie Wiesel, who was an inmate in more than one of the concentration camps. Wiesel’s simple but powerful descriptions conveyed the grotesque and bizarre events that took place behind barbed wire. The behavior of his characters reflects the complexity of human nature. The inmates he describes do not react in the same ways to their suffering. Students projected themselves into the book and identified with one behavior or another. “1 would have done just what most of them did. Re- fuse to believe it; and keep on hoping and praying and keeping my mouth shut! What would any of us here be capable of in such circumstances, anyway? Seventy- five pounds of skin and bone and no one who cared if we lived or died?” Wiesel's description of the cruel murder of an inmate who tried to escape was one reason why many students related to those who remained silent, hoping that luck—or God—would spare them. Wiesel shows how survival was the instinct which also motivated some to keep quiet, while the same instinct motivated others to trample over their dying friends to get at a scrap of bread. They learn that man is capable of behaving in still other ways. He is a complex creature; and Wiesel reveals this by telling of an old man who runs around trying to cheer people up to help them bear the pain. He does this in spite of the fact that he, like the others, had also been forced to exist in the animal-like conditions of the barracks where men were made to lie in their own and others’ excrement. Still another inmate—to the amazement of students—continued to play his beloved violin though he was too weak to move.

Wiesel tells, also, of inmates who collaborated with the Nazis; their survival instinct led these Jews to take an extra cup of soup and a clean bed in return for helping the Nazis dispose of bodies or oversee the barracks. Some students admitted they would probably have gone against their principles and collaborated in hopes that they would be liberated from Hitler’s “final solution”—the death of all Jews. Others said they probably would have resisted and risked death rather than live under such conditions. Several hoped that they would have had the strength and will to help their friends. Reading about Wiesel’s personal experience led the students to ask, “What accounts for the differences in man’s behavior under stress?” This far-reaching question, which touches on the very essence of human beings’ nature, had naturally evolved from their earlier, more factual inquiries concerning the Holocaust. This inquiry brought the students to three of the excerpts located in the text—primary sources which included the words of Western philosophers who had grappled with such eternal questions as “What is good and evil?” and “Is man by nature good or evil?” Phi- losopher John Locke concluded that man was basically good and governed by reason. Thomas Hobbes, also writing in the seventeenth century, concluded the opposite; and Niccolo Machiavelli, fifteenth-sixteenth century Italian, observing the political scene, viewed the masses as generally ignorant and willing to be deceived. A prince could rule with favor, according to Machiavelli, if he deceived his people and convinced them that his ends justified any one of the means he chose to employ. Students immediately noted some of these characteristics in Hitler. The excerpts from the works of these men challenged the interpretive skills of the students. Where they read Wiesel with few problems, they needed teacher assistance in reading these sources. While it is true that students in a social studies class need to learn about human beings and the meaning of events, they also need to gain the tools for investigating ideas on their own. Defining the vocabulary and analyzing a single sentence in a paragraph by Hobbes provide students with the opportunity to learn and practice such skills. And the subject matter of the Holocaust provided the motivation for the students to translate such sophisticated works. Ninth graders can learn very difficult concepts when they are approached in the right way. In this case, charts helped students structure the beliefs of the philosophers; and, by the sixth day, students were making comments, identifying with one view or another:

“I’m a Hobbesian; I really feel we’re basically evil and would stay that way unless we were taught to be good.” Others resisted this view and insisted that human beings are not born with any nature. They learn everything. ‘‘Murderers aren’t born; they’re made,” said one boy. The teacher suggested that further research be done, and a debate was scheduled for the following week. One side, arguing that human nature was naturally belief. The evil, would provide evidence to support its opposing side would search for evidence of humans goodness. As one might expect, there were glaring examples of human beings’ inhumanity to other human the beings, many closely paralleling the Holocaust: genocide of the American Indian, the slaughter of the Armenians by the Turks, the Spanish Inquisition. Arti- others. Yet, students cles in the text referred to still human found heartening examples of the other side of They nature as they looked around their community. relationships saw goodness in everyday, one-to-one mak- between people: helping a friend with a problem; or deed. ing someone happy with a kind word of how 1 treat “I’m really so much more aware it in me to be people,” said a girl. “I know I've got both good and evil.” sensitizing These primary sources played a role in others’ behavior. Per- the students to their own and undertook these cha - haps one reason they willingly concerning human nature lenging reading assignments was their realization that these writers were really talking about the students themselves and the nature of all human beings throughout history. These philosophical views transcend the time periods in which they were expressed. That is why we still refer to them today. This quality of timelessness also characterized four paperback books which students were able to read and comprehend on their own. Anne Frank’s Diary of a Young Girl is more than a period piece of the Holo- caust, because it deals with the timeless problems of an adolescent girl’s search for identity. The diary describes the experience of Anne and her family as occu- pants of a “secret annex” in the shop of a sympathetic Dutchman who helped hide the Franks from the Nazis. The book helps us to see the hardships of living under close conditions, as well as the awakening of a young girl into early womanhood. Friedrich , by Hans Peter Richter, was another book that confronted young readers with the universal problems in human relationships. This is a story of a Ger- man boy and his friendship with a Jewish boy, Frie- drich, during the Nazi years. Richter’s book / Was There tells a story—again in simple language—of four boys in the Hitler Youth Movement and the pressures on them to join this movement or be rejected by their peers. This book also helps students understand why some German families were silent; why others followed enthusiastically; and why others resisted Hitler. This is done through looking at the attitudes of the boys’ parents. Following the completion of these books, the students’ understanding was heightened through role- playing, an activity which enabled students to “become” the Germans portrayed in Richter’s books and in the seven case studies located in their text. Many of the people they played reminded students of their own parents. One boy, playing the role of a German factory worker, used words that he expected his own father might have spoken—his father also being a factory worker:

“My family comes first. I can’t risk their lives to save a Jew 1 don’t even know.” “But,” argued a ‘German woman,’ “what if you happened to be in the group chosen as victim? Wouldn’t you expect some help from people who were German like yourself and had committed no crime?” Role-playing was a valuable activity here and throughout the unit. As a result of role-playing, students were able to identify their own values as well as the values of people different from themselves. They were better able to place themselves in the context of historical events. While they role-played, it was as if a time machine had propelled them back into the 1940s. They began to individualize the meaning of the Holo- caust by reading books about young people and by participating in related scenarios. There were still other books listed in the bibliogra- that phy contained believable characters whose feelings and problems were not so very different from the students’. Encountering characters like these makes students—who otherwise aren’t motivated to open a book—want to read. Another book of this type was Nathaniel Benchley’s Bright Candles: A Novel of the Danish Resistance, which tells of a sixteen-year-old Danish boy who joins in sabotage against the occupy- ing Germans, in opposition to his parents, who believe that cooperation is the safest course. But when the Jews are rounded up, and Jewish friends are taken away, the whole family joins the resistance. Portrayed here is a boy whose bravery and morality guide his parents, instead of the other way around, which is usually the case. This impressed the students. And not all young Germans joined the Hitler Youth Movement described earlier in Richter’s book. There were young Germans who held different values. Some resisted. Excerpts are included in the text from Inge Scholl’s The Resistance of the White Rose, which describes an actual underground movement, “The White Rose,” in 1942-1943, made up of Munich students who attempted, unsuccessfully, to erode Hitler’s power. That students like themselves were actually willing to sacrifice their lives for a higher morality served as an inspiration to the ninth-graders who reluctantly admitted they might have done what the German boy in Frie- drich did and buckled to the pressure of parents to sacrifice their friendship with a Jew out of fear of punishment. But showing students what is possible and what they are capable of is one of the important functions served by these fictional and nonfictional accounts of the Holocaust. These were books, then, that dealt with timeless problems which confronted adolescents everywhere.

Filmstrips By the eighth day of the unit, students were beginning to answer their earlier questions about what conditions were like in Germany that could have led to a Holocaust. They were assisted by four filmstrips which provided a look at German history through actual photographs and news stories. The events in Ger- many before World War II became more than unrelated facts after they viewed “The Making of the German Nation: 1815-1945.” The misery of the Ger- as stu- man people after World War I became clear dents viewed the faces of Germans—faces which reflected the bitterness caused by poverty, joblessness. ,

and the Treaty of Versailles, which had crippled Ger- man pride and military ability. In their discussions, students explained why they thought Germans accepted Hitler. “The people really wanted desperately to believe Hitler would make them great and secure again. People will believe anything when they’re hungry.” Several wondered if a Holocaust could happen here if there was an economic crisis; and one girl recalled how a strong leader—Richard Nixon—was able to de- ceive the American people about events surrounding the Watergate burglary. Could such events ever lead to something of Holocaust proportion?

“Could be,” said one boy. “Maybe it wouldn’t be

the Jews again; maybe it would; but if what went on in Auschwitz could happen in a civilized country in 1941

why couldn’t it happen in any civilized country at any time—even 1976—if people are really blinded by their own problems and hate?” Students would again confront the future later in the unit.

Writing of Papers The class was ready by the end of the second week to demonstrate in writing their understanding of the unit thus far. They had viewed films and filmstrips, read books and excerpts from books, and had numer- ous discussions. The teacher assigned the first of the three papers they would be expected to complete by the end of the twelve weeks. Now students could practice some of the skills so important for communicating their ideas. The place for using these skills was not limited to the English classroom. Social Studies involves the student in expressing what he or she has learned from, given materials. So the Social Studies classroom is a place for sharpening those skills. With the help of John Good’s introduction to the Study of History (Holt, Rinehart, 1966), the teacher assisted students in writing a paper in which they had to create a generalization—or hypothesis—and develop it using appropriate sources for support and explanation. Their hypotheses might change, noted the teacher, after they encountered the next several readings; but through their current responses—which they would share with their classmates—their present understanding would be made clear to the teacher and to themselves. By the third week, students were getting impatient victim because they still could not explain why the chosen was the Jew. One excerpt in the text of readings from Gordon Allport’s The Nature of Prejudice explained theories surrounding the origins and growth they of prejudice and anti-Semitism. The Jews, unwar- learned, had been a scapegoat—the object of both in ranted blame and persecution—for centuries, learned of Europe and in their native Israel. Students attitudes the Christian roots of anti-Semitism and how are slowly changing. Most of the students had some idea of what prei- ic ® mea t - ,n one d '? 'scussion, some mentioned that p,.lacks and members of other racial minorities didn’t always get equal opportunities in this country. One noted that she heard people call Poles “dumb Po- lacks just because they had heard other people saying that Another observed that the members of his particular clique at school were probably being prejudiced every time they excluded someone from theii group who just didn’t seem to be like them. Several referred to political and religious conflicts they had seen covered on the television news; conflicts between Protestants and Catholics in Ireland; and Moslems and Christians in Lebanon—all examples of the irrational prejudice in people. Their comments reflected the fact that students had an awareness of some instances of prejudice. But knowledge of the origins of prejudice—and anti-Semi- tism—was something they had never explored. The explanations provided by Allport might have remained abstractions for some of the less capable readers in the class if these excerpts had not been followed up by the use of two films which translate prejudice into scenes and images which ninth-graders can take hold of.

Additional Films “Eye of the Storm’’ scared them. This film showed how an elementary-school teacher taught her third- grade students what prejudice felt like. She made the blue-eyed students special and gave them privileges and praise; the brown-eyed children were to be “infe- rior.” Then, after a couple of days, she reversed the roles. The blue-eyed kids had stereotyped the brown- eyed kids. Later on, the blue-eyed kids became the scapegoats for the brown-eyed kids every time something in the class went wrong. “They got so carried away!” exclaimed a student during the discussion which followed the twenty-five minute film. “The kids seemed to forget that it was only pretend. Those blue-eyed kids actually seemed to enjoy hurting the other kids and being treated special. Amazing. Really amazing.” The class realized how easy it was to learn to hate; to learn prejudice. Stu- dents came away from the film with the stark recognition that if such treatment could arbitrarily happen to one group, “it could happen to me, too!” After viewing this film, students now were able to apply difficult concepts to concrete situations. Prejudice is a “disease of the mind” according to “A Day in the Night of Jonathan Mole,” a second film which helped students conceptualize prejudice. This film portrays a frustrated and angry man who is dis- satisfied with his life, his job, his wife; he dreams one night that he is a judge with the power to convict three people —members of minority groups—of having characteristics which make them unworthy of the privileges accorded to citizens of his country: characteristics such as being Jewish; being an Indian; or being an immigrant. The basis of Jonathan Mole’s convictions reflects the diseased mind of one who hates for irrational reasons. This film uses a pictorial analogy to help students see how prejudice originates; and it parodies the people in our society—the bigot and the “parrot”—who perpetuate it. The only person’s name familiar to the students when the unit was first introduced was, of course, Adolf Hitler. They associated this name with “a nut,” “a crazy man who killed thousands of people,” “a lu- natic who wanted to conquer the world,” or “the man with the funny moustache.” Their only encounter with Nazis, it seemed, was while watching “Hogan’s , Heroes” on television. So, during the fifth week of the | unit, when the question to be discussed was “Who must bear the responsibility for the Holocaust?”, they placed all of the blame on Hitler. It seemed important for the teacher to broaden their perspective. That was the ourpose in showing “The Hangman,” a film based

on ; poem by Maurice Ogden. Although the film is only twelve minutes long, the students sat transfixed from the beginning by the animated images which slowly passed before them. The film conveys in the simplest terms the message that we are all responsible human beings—and one day we will be liable to answer for it; that anyone who remains silent in the face of evil is a “henchman” of those who do evil. One by one, the hangman kills the citizens of a town; no one speaks out; and little by little, the gallows grow more grotesque, more threatening with each hanging; and when the last man is left and the hangman comes for him, he cries out, “1 did nothing. Why me?”

“Because,” says the hangman, “it is you I have

really come for. For 1 did no more than you let me do.”

Who Was Responsible? Students discovered that there was no single answer to the question of “Who was responsible for the Holo- caust?” There were alternative interpretations, which depended on a person’s values and frame of reference. The poet of “The Hangman” presented one perspective on the concept of responsibility, and he implies that the responsibility for something like the Ho- locaust lay with anyone in Germany and the world outside who knew and remained silent. Some students agreed with this view. Others expressed slightly different opinions: “1 think Hitler is the most responsible. He got the .” whole thing going; he had charisma . . Several couldn’t accept that idea. “It may have been Hitler’s plan, but he couldn’t have murdered all those millions if lots of people had tried to stop him.” One of the excerpts in the text related another time in more recent history when people did not accept responsibility in preventing tragedy. This article describes the killing in Queens, New York, of Kitty Gen- ovese in the 1960s, to which thirty-eight witnesses did not respond. They pulled down their shades and closed their ears to her screams for help; none of them picked up the telephone to call the police. They did not want to get involved. Students learned of collaborators who assisted the Nazis in their rounding up and extermination of Jews. They were Poles, Russians, Frenchmen—many of whom had grown up with anti-Semitism and thus saw in Hitler’s plan a chance to act out their own feelings. A poem in the text by Russian poet Yevgeny Yevtu- shenko tells of the massacre by soldiers of thousands of Jews who were shot and buried in an open pit in Babi Yar, also the title of the poem. Thus the question of who was responsible did not prove to be as simple to answer as the students had thought. Few questions that arise in the Social Studies are simple to answer. They became aware of the difficulties involved in determining when moral responsibility to one’s fellow human being should take priority over responsibility to oneself and to one’s country. These are timeless dilemmas which transcend the period of the Holocaust. People throughout history have had to make such decisions about individual responsibility. In one discussion, students shared their feelings about this issue of moral responsibility in their own lives. “What if you saw someone in the hall getting beaten

up? I did once and I just stared. And some of the kids—really good kids, too—actually cheered. Why do we do that anyway?” Another student brought up the question of responsibility if you see someone cheating on a test; or steal- ing something; or telling a lie. The Holocaust involved questions which students had to deal with in their own lives. And helping students relate ideas in the classroom to their own lives is often a valuable pedagogical practice. To finally settle the question of “Who was guilty of which these crimes?”, students organized a debate in re- each of four teams reflected all of the alternative for sponses to that question. They prepared carefully to evaluate the this debate, and the teacher was able students’ understanding through the debate. Related Questions The students proceeded to related questions which became the focus of the sixth week: If you were a Jew and didn’t resist, were you then partially responsible for your fate?; and if you were a non-Jew who didn’t speak out, were you then as responsible as the Nazis? Thus the concept of responsibility appeared in- extricably entwined with that of resistance. Several readings in the text helped students deal with the question of why there was so little resistance. Wiesel’s book Night had revealed the overwhelming obstacles that kept most Jews from resisting actively. Excerpts from Judah Pilch’s articles also explained why there was little resistance. But perhaps more importantly. Pilch discusses ways they did resist. He describes the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising by Jews who resisted the Nazis using arms they had smuggled in via their underground network. There were inspiring stories of Jews in Israel who left their homes to parachute into the for- ests of Europe to join the partisans who were organizing to resist the Germans. And he describes the passive forms of resistance of those in the ghetto who maintained their human dignity in the face of animal- like oppressors. Many answers appeared in the readings explaining why some non-Jews did not resist: some agreed with Hitler and eagerly assisted him in carrying out his plan; some feared for their lives if they spoke out; some were obedient to laws even if those laws were based on the irrational motives of a dictator; others believed Hitler’s promises and hoped for their own survival. The excerpt from Eric H offer’s True Believer was especially useful in revealing some of the reasons why people blindly follow the ideologies and “band- wagons” of mass movements such as Nazism. “The team spirit,” was how one boy put it. “You don’t go against the team. You give up your individ- uality for the sake of winning; and because you want so much to belong.” In each discussion, students were consistently en- couraged by the teacher to relate the material to their own lives, to try to put themselves into situations where feelings might be similar. “I probably wouldn’t have resisted the Nazis,” ex-

plained one student. “Look, I never resist my teachers. I’d be afraid of the consequences. And I'd like to know what any of us would do if the President of the United States asked us to do something right now!” Obedience to authority was a concept explored in one of the readings; an article describing Stanley Mil- gram’s psychological experiment at Yale in which subjects continued to obey an authority figure—the doc- their tasks were tor—even though it appeared that resulting in intense pain for others in the experiment. —

What became apparent here—and the students readily grasped it—was that despite our individual inclina- tions, many of us lose our ability to think for ourselves when faced with a figure that we perceive as wiser or stronger than ourselves.

Eyewitnesses On the Friday of the seventh week of the unit, the class sat immobilized by a description of Dachau given by one of the student’s fathers who had liberated the inmates of that camp when he was a soldier in the Sev- enth Army. His descriptions were vivid, shocking, and authentic. Listening to people who were actually there, on the scene, and who had viewed the horrors firsthand, can be even more valuable than film in making history real for students. They learned from another guest speaker how her grandmother escaped and spent years trying to get her husband out of Europe, and every time he got close, something happened; either he was unable to complete the deal for a forged passport, or the risk was too great at a particular time. Then, finally, when he did get a boat and was on the Atlantic—certain of freedom—the ship was blown up—a mystery—a tragic, unspeakable fate. The students couldn’t stop asking her questions about how her grandmother felt when the Nazis took away all her rights and fired her husband from his job; or how it felt to have neighbors—once friends walk away afraid to speak to her for fear of being seen by the secret police or simply by neighbors acting as spies. Here was a story being told to them in the classroom about the very same situation described by Rich- ter in Friedrich and by Wiesel in Night, the books they had read earlier. These person-to-person remarks will not be forgotten by students. They remain vivid im-

pressions in the minds of students who are able to carry on a dialogue with the speakers or interview them on tape. Often, such people live in or near the community in which the unit is taught—and if they are willing to come to the school, these people can become one of the most effective primary sources. By the time students have progressed to the tenth week of the unit, they have seen the Holocaust both as a unique example of human beings’ inhumanity to oth- of a er human beings and as one of the many examples failed to time in history when society was on trial and students reveal its more constructive capabilities. The have some answers now about the facts of the Holo- knowledge of dif- caust and its aftermath. They have about a per- ferent ways humans behave under stress; son’s responsibility to others; and about human beings. beings’ attitudes toward their fellow human Could the Holocaust Happen Again? The students’ final endeavor—and one which seems to evolve naturally—is to look at a question which projects them into the future: “Could something like the Holocaust happen again?” One place students looked for some potential clues was in science fiction literature. Excerpts from George Orwell’s 1984 and Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World are included among the readings in the students’ text. Both Orwell and Huxley explore in different ways a distinct vision of the future involving centralized control. They describe the psychological, scientific, and political methods used to bring about absolute totalitarian control of society. Although these authors are implying that such a future might someday exist, the students already know that some of this science fiction became a reality under Hitler; and they are able to make parallels between the two. Students saw in Hitler’s policies the potential that society today has for totally controlling population growth and direction. Hitler had destroyed “impure” peoples—Jews, Gypsies, and the mentally defective and handicapped. He had supported Himm- ler’s creation of the Lebensborn Movement, for example, which involved breeding programs to repro- duce an Aryan super-race in which children with blonde hair and blue eyes were kidnapped by the state and mated. Students noted that this was not so very different from the test-tube babies of Brave New World. They had been informed by one of the science teachers about some of the complex questions today’s scientists face related to our ever-advancing technology: Should a scientist continue to create even though his discoveries may lead to undesirable results? How far should humans go along the lines of producing life in test-tubes, of choosing the sex of babies, of redefining life and death? These science fiction excerpts prepared students for some of the real problems they would face as adults. They compared the controlling techniques of “Big Brother” in 1984 with the secret police who invaded the innermost lives and minds of the German people and exposed them to the constant barrage of propaganda centrally controlled by the Nazis. Then they looked today— at similar examples of totalitarianism existing China, the government-controlled press in Russia and the CIA, for example; the illegal spying on citizens by the which was described in one excerpt. Were these could lead to real “seeds” that— if left unchecked— excel pts in another catastrophe in the future? Other future possibili- the text helped students focus on such

reading Their look into the future had started with Huxley. Their science fiction literature by Orwell and 205

earlier inquiries into good and evil had brought them to the discipline of philosophy which addressed the ideas surrounding human nature. In fact, the unit could be adapted to take on several different emphases because it addresses nearly all of the disciplines. The study of the Holocaust reflects the idea that human knowledge is not compartmentalized; everything relates to everything else. Using the ideas in several fields helped students fit the pieces of the Holocaust question together. that And is one of the teacher’s goals in guiding his or her students: making whole pictures or concepts out of collections of facts.

Concluding the Unit Showing a film (“Night and Fog”) seemed the best way to initiate the unit because of its ability to introduce concrete and real images to which students could refer while reading the text. A film is also a good way to conclude a unit because it can act as a tool for review. “Judgment at Nuremberg,” a full-length mo- tion picture, reinforced the learning that had taken

place over twelve weeks. The fictional look at the tri-

als held for Nazi war criminals brought to mind all of the questions students had tackled earlier regarding the dilemmas and complexities of the Holocaust and its implications. Flashing again on the screen were the scenes of live

skeletons, gas chambers . . . ovens for innocent mil-

lions . . . witnesses testifying about the brutality they

had experienced at the hands of inhuman people . . . and, finally, the images of people who insisted: “It

wasn’t I; I was only taking orders.”

FILMS MENTIONED IN ARTICLE :

"A Day in the Night of Jonathan Mole," 33 minutes; Rental: $12.50, Anti- Defamation League, 315 Lexington Avenue, New York City.

"Eye of the Storm," ABC-TV News Special, 25 minutes; Rental: $30.00, Anti -Defamation League, 315 Lexington Avenue, New York City.

"The Hangman," 12 minutes; Rental: $6.50, McGraw-Hill, New York, N.Y.

"Judgment at Nuremberg," 186 minutes; Rental: $125.00, United Artists

"Night and Fog," 33 minutes; Rental: $20.00, Syracuse Films, 1^55 East Colvin Street, Syracuse, N.Y. 13210. 206

appendix c Memorandum to Teachers About to Administer Pre-TWc

TO: Teachers of the Holocaust Unit FROM: Roselle

RE: Pre-Test on the Holocaust and Related Issues- Its Purpose and Administration

Thanks so much for your willingness to administer this pre-(and 6 e P t0 yOUr Dinth graders "ho ate about to study 3.the Holocaust.Ho^o T->^With your assistance, we will be able to answer these questions:

1. What are students learning in terms of Holocaust-related material from an interdisciplinary perspective?

2. Are students able to apply their knowledge about the Holocaust and interdisciplinary problem-solving to contemporary and past issues?

What changes in attitude result?

The pre-test items are intended to help answer these questions.

Again, thanks!

Roselle

I. DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING THE PRE-TEST

Below are some of the questions (with answers) you might have concerning the administering of the pre-test.

Question #1 : What do I tell students about the purpose of their taking this pre-test?

Answer : a. First of all, please tell the students that this test will not be graded for use in deciding their report card marks. The purpose of the pre-test is to "find out what they know and believe concerning the Holo- caust —which is the unit they are about to study." 207

b. You can, of course, mention that use of this kind of testing is often the way any unit (subject matter) evaluated, i 3 and that this also is part of a project that I (Mrs. Chartock) am carrying out with the support of the rest of the Social Studies Department.

c. Although they are not being graded for report card purposes, please emphasize the importance of their trying to do the best they can so that the changes in their learning can be honestly shown .

d. Indicate that they will he informed of the overall results.

Question #2 : How long will the test take?

Answer: a. The first half—the opinions scales —will probably take from 8-10 minutes. The second half— short answer and essay—will probably take the rest of the period.

b. Please emphasize that they should work quickly but thoughtfully. Long explanations are not necessary for any item.

Question #3: What do I say about anonymity?

Answer: Their responses on the pre-tests will remain anonymous. A number will appear at the top of each page of their pre-test. The purpose of this number is to enable the tester (me) to match it with the number on their post- test. Both numbers will appear on 3 x 5 cards. In order to correlate or compare two tests taken by the

same student , the following steps need to be taken immediately after distributing the pre-tests.

a. Give each student a 3 x 5 card at the same time you give them a pre-test.

b. Tell them to write their name on the card and next to their name the number that appears at the top of their pre-test.

c. Please walk around and collect the 3x5 cards while at the same time checking to see that each student recorded his proper name and the actual number that appears on his test. ,

208

To teacher:

d. The purpose of the cards is to make sure their names do not appear on the test while at the same time enabling me to correlate their pre-test with their post-test. They will fill out another card before taking the post-test. The two numbers will be matched and their names then will be totally eliminated. Mention of post-test is unnecessary.

Question #h : What kinds of clarifying information can I give if a student wants a word defined or a question explained while s(he) is taking the test?

Answer: Some terms on the test are difficult to understand—especially since the students have not yet been exposed to the Holocaust material. Please tell them "to do the best they can with what they do understand and not to worry about the terms and questions which they can’t answer." **********

By the way don 1 , 1 feel as if you have to tell the class all of the above, since many will not be concerned with anything except: "Will it count?" I refer you to Answer #l.c. for that one I It counts in terms of everyone—themselves included—finding out what changes actually come about as a result of this unit.

NOTE: For the purposes of this study, I would appreciate it if all teachers could complete the teaching of the unit at approximately the same time so that the post-test can be administered to all classes on the same day.

Thanks

Roselle 209

PLEASE RETURN THIS SHEET TO ME. THANK YOU . Roselle.

11 • DISCUSSION and classroom visits

1 * 1 ^ould -Like to discuss the unit with you, both now and after the unit is completed to find out some of the observations you have made concerning the teaching and learning of the Holocaust unit. This "interview” should last no more than ten (10) minutes and can be scheduled at your convenience. Could you please indicate a date and time during the next week and a half when I could talk with you?

DAY TIME

2. In order to determine the kinds of methods being used to teach the Holocaust, I would like to visit the classes at least once a week. Could you please indicate what kind of arrangement would be most suitable for you in terms of the scheduling of these visits by circling one

of the following alternatives :

1. I would like you to give me an eight -week schedule now which indicates each time you will be visiting my class.

2. I would like to be notified by you at least one day before you visit my class.

3. There is no need to notify me first about your visits to my class.

Signed,

(Your Name) 210

appendix d

A__Sample Copy of the Pre-test Given to

if _ TO THE STUDENT : This set of questions and statements is not a test since you will not_ be graded and your name wilFnot appear on these sheets. The purpose of this exercise is to help me find out what ideas students already know and believe concerning aspects of the Holocaust unit which you are about to study.* Since you will remain anonymous, please be as honest and specific as you can in completing these questions. Please work quickly, trying not to dwell on any one item too long.

Thank you very much.

Roselle Chartock

* Words in this sentence were slightly changed on the Post-test: The purpose of this exercise is to help me find out what ideas students learned and now believe concerning aspects of the Holocaust unit which you have just studied. . :

211

To the Student

0 8 ^ 8 of statements concerning public opinion i er^a^d^Tn -! °nS °n n gen- Jews * are statements believebelipvA ? that some people and some people don’t. For each statement, please indi! SSi' the ™ ~t

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Your responses will remain anonymous.

I. Public Opinions :

1. No weakness or difficulty can hold us back if we have enouKh will power.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 2. Sex crimes, such as rape and attacks on children, deserve more than mere imprisonment; such criminals ought to be publicly whipped, or worse.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

3. Much of our lives are controlled by plots hatched in secret places

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

Reading the stars can tell us a great deal about the future.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

5. People can be divided into two distinct classes — the weak and the strong.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

6. The answers to our country's problems are much simpler than the experts would have us believe.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

7. Teachers should be allowed to paddle children who do not behave in school.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 212

8 PraCtlCal experience ls ’ worth all the books put 9. together.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree Getting to the top is more a matter of luck than ability. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 10. Most people in government are not really interested in the problems of the average man.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 11. You sometimes can't help wondering whether anything is worth- while anymore.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 12. Most people will go out of their way to help someone else.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

13. Nowadays, a person has to live pretty much for today and let tomorrow take care of itself.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

lU . If you try hard enough, you can usually get what you want.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

15. It is safest to assume that all people have a vicious streak and it will come out when they are given a chance.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

II. Opinions on Jews :

1. Dislike of the Jews comes mainly from misunderstanding.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

2. Jews monopolize everything to the detriment of Americans.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

3. The Jews are an isolated group in society because of their religion.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 213

14 . Jews will stoop to any kind of deceit in order to gain their own ends.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

5 . Jews are as valuable, honest, and public-spirited citizens as any other group.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

6 . There axe both "good" and "bad" Jews, as there are both kinds of Americans and there is not much to choose between them on the whole.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

T. The Jews as a whole cannot be held responsible for misdeeds of a minority who run foul of the laws and customs of this country.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

8 . Jews corrupt everything with which they come into contact.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

9 . There is no reason to believe that innately the Jews are less honest and good than anyone else.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

10 . The dislike of many people for the Jews is based on prejudice, but is nevertheless not without a certain justification.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

11 . The Jews are mentally and morally superior to most other people.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

12 . The Jews have too much power and influence in this country.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

13 . The Jews have a stranglehold on this country.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree lU. The Jews have survived persecution because of the many admir- able qualities they show.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 2114

15. Jews, in their dealings with others, are an absolute menace. money-grabbing, and unscrupulous. Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 16. S J yal ^ C0Untry ln Vhlch a^ otter onizene? the*

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree IT. Jews lack physical courage.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

18 . The Jews are a menace to any nation and to any country in which they happen to live.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree 19. The Jews are a decent set of people on the whole.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

20 . The Jews should give up their separate customs and become average citizens of this country.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

^1* There are too many Jews in highly paid professions.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

22. Jews can’t be expected to behave any better toward the rest of the world than the rest of the world behaves toward them.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

23. The Jews are the most despicable form of mankind which crawls the earth.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree

2b. The Jewish menace has been much exaggerated.

Strongly agree Agree Uncertain Disagree Strongly disagree )

215

A. Problem : S ”ead thC followin 8 Problem carefully and carry out tb/^the directions given.

Directions : a 6 eat Problem- solver, so the President of theIhl United States^ asksf you to recommend some steps he should take in order to create a country that is free from the disease of prejudice.

Answer : Some steps the President should take in order to bring about a country free from prejudice are: (Think of as many as you can .

1 .

2 .

3 .

5 .

6 .

8. 216

B * Problem Related to Current Issue r Below are two related problems or dilemmas. carefully. Read each one

Dilemma During World War II; Current Problem : An American manufacturer in An American manufacturer 1938 (pre-World War II) who who sells weapons' parts is aware of Hitler's anti- to South Africa is aware of Jewish policies, must decide the extreme segregation if he will sell weapons and policy of that government. machinery to Hitler or re- He must decide duce his production if he will and lay continue to off workers. sell to the white Minority government or give up one of his biggest importers.

Question: Before^ ese two manufacturers can solve their problems, both oi -Lnem will be forced to ask themselves the same questions. What are two questions they first might ask themselves?

1 .

2 .

(This version appeared on the Post-test)

B. Problems Related to Past Issues : Below are two related problems or dilemmas. Read each one carefully.

Dilemma during World War II : Past Problem : A German teenager must decide During the Vietnam War, an if s(he) will lie when asked by American teenager of nine- the Gestapo about where his teen who is against U.S. in- Jewish friend is hiding or volvement in Vietnam must de- tell the truth — that he is cide if he will answer his hiding in his attic. draft board's call or find a way to Canada.

Question : Before these teenagers can solve their problems , both of them will be forced to ask themselves certain questions, What are two questions they first might ask themselves?

1 .

2. 217

C . Two Short Essays :

Please answer the two essay questions which follow. Work quickly so as to include as many ideas as you can. Good luck.

1 . How would you answer a ten-year-old who asked you, "Why did the Holocaust happen?" 218

2. You are a selectman and you attend the local town meeting at vhich all of the opinions and thoughts related to the location of the proposed town dump will be voiced. List some of the ideas you might expect to hear that might influence your decision about the location of the dump.

(This version appeared on the post-test:)

2. You are a selectman and you attend the local town meeting at which all of the opinions and thoughts related to the location of the proposed bypass will be voiced. List some of the ideas you might expect to hear that might influence your decision about the location and construction of the bypass. 219

appendix e

Results of (Responses to ) the Initial Interview and Po st-Interview with Teachers of the Holocaust

The responses of the four teachers to the initial fifteen questions and their responses to the six interview questions given after the completion of their teaching are presented in Charts #1 and #2 respectively.

The actual interview questions are presented first and the responses appear in the charts following these questions.

Pre-Test Interview Questions

1. How many years have you taught and on what grade level? What grade level do you presently teach?

2. What subjects have you taught on the high school level?

3. Have you ever held jobs outside of the teaching profession? If yes, what jobs and how many years for each?

b. What is the highest degree you have earned thus far?

5. Your major as an undergraduate? Your minor?

6. Did you ever take a course that was described as interdisciplinary or which you considered as interdisciplinary? If yes, what are the titles of these courses?

7 . How old were you when you first heard about the fact that six million Jews were slaughtered under Nazi rule?

8. Before actually teaching this unit had you ever studied about the topic as a student or as a teacher before this? If yes, please describe when and to what extent.

9- Are you Jewish or Christian? To what extent do you practice your faith?

10. Do you remember your first contact with someone who was Jew- ish? If so, please describe that relationship or experience. 220

11 . V U e e e a If yes° please describe PerS° nally? your experience brlefly.

12 . e i n f adV C;e ab°Ut ^terLfthat you teachinS this coSd Rive t j; the Holocaust before, If yes/pL^

13 . 1” Pri "" teaching thfHoLcausWterS" " 3r functi °"

14 . What . is your preferred style of teaching? cussion (lecture, dis- , small groups, one-to-one)

15. What are three outcomes in your students you would see as a result of like to their exposure to this material? i

221

bo ro

o o c: O cn *2 ro O • o a 3 o O cn i 4 a cn n 1 i d o c+ cn H* H- c+ c+ H a c: B c+ •d p H P • Cn H- O p tr H- • o o a P B o H« H o c+ W3 H B 'd Pi w O O B 3 «< § c+ H* 0) o H* cn o P H* 3 00 d c+ c+ CD a* o fj a o cn i <3 'Cn cn 0 p as cn h* H-

d 1 w a > o fcd DURING • H P g H- 3 p P • WITH TO cn P d d 3 >3 P c+ c+ 4 pi M t) cn d 3 SV h a H H 1 H- P O • H* P cn H H- cn P

c+ M > o O « cn cn H t-3 p a a d O o • H- o o • M X 00 c+ p o M o o > 4 p 4 P 3 c+ h a p B cn P cn O C+ H> H* H a O a P H* H- d c+ H • H* O P o bn H- w c+ a H w o 5 Hi c+ H 00 ra 4 < 1 •— c+ P S3 *d M H- d W 3! H- VS o sr ad • • •• o Pi c+ P H- Hi H 00 P p 3 H P cn cn H* M P P cn H a H* H O P W c+ c+ N a d o 4=- 4 1 Pi t— cn t-* o O O P 1 Pi cn S3 H f—1 «<: *. 3 cn H *<; o p H-q to) c+ 3 p H a a p p cn p a p 00 d d d c+ 00 SV a cn i p 1 222 223 3 CO c+ 3 c+ 3" 3* O c+ H* 3 P H- O O P *-*> O P Pi H Pi < <* 3 *o C_k P M P P c+ P 1 3* 3* 3 P O B p co O 3) O O P 3 & c+ • {+ P< Pi o *d 3> ^ 3- P P P 3 o' CD H Vd P i p H H- ^ P c+ < o H- w 3 P 3 3* P S' << P 1-b 3 P c- E3 CO O O 1 3 Od 3 Pi P 3 OCJ < . P O O P P o' 3 < a P O l • • 3 3 <+ O 3 3 I I d c+ •

c-1 tr) H* 3 CO 3 P P P, CO £ p p <3 H c+ P H t-3 H c+ CO H o P Pi 3 3 P H- c+ P • 1 p 3 p t— 3 <5 CO CO *5 c+ Pi O p- to O Pi < p s P 3 CO c+ CO c+ 3 H- O S' g < 3 • M p • tr 3 n < CO O c+ K 3 c+ p O' CO P s & w o O CO • S3 Pi O' P «d g p - P P c-g P •-b P c+ CO CO c+ H 3 < c+ S 3 5 O 3 Hi CO =te 3 P p H- P H- p P H* 3 (—1 3* ro 0 TO H p t-3 c+ < P Pi *3 P a 3 3* P P S' 3 O' CO H * 03 < P p O

< 3 Pi Pi Pi P 3) 3 i-3 P O H- H- H- 3 P o S3 3 c+ CO 3> S' P < • > P c+ 3> 3 P O B H- P — P w W P 3 3 c+ o' 3 t-3 w 3 c+ O P 3 O O' a O c+ c+ 3 S' c+ 3 P < p H» O 3 3 3 H- 3 O P O < Pi P U) 3 3 •

p H* B I-1 o P o' H c+ P <+ P d 3 Ch P oq o ta i-g 3 • Hi H c+ 3 H H* 3 O' P p P P 3 3 3 tr hg o P ffi < o • Hj P w o O' B H- P CO CO O < td 3 O 3 H' Pi CO o 3 td c-i 3 3 3 H p K 3 O 3 H O P 3 P O' OQ c+ p 3 3 P t?3 c+ 3 CO < < H* c+ 3 H* 3 CO CO O' <+ d O < a P H c+ H- p P Pi < H- c+ Pi • CO o P • S' p 3 C+ CO W B P CO H- O 3 CO 3 =»fc CO P O' P P H c+ O' 3 3 o < P p Jr- • d td Cn s* P P 3 M H- p Pi H *! o P p p 5 S d < P P 3 O' 3 w 3 C tr • O' m P P 3 3 c+ P P 3) P O Hi c+ c-1 H- p o P 3 P P pi H* 3 c+ B p CO H (W O' 3 < B V) o' 3 3 P tH H- p *; O' 3) 3 O CO B H- P 3 P to P < 3 • O' P O P c+ B O CO c+ (t H s P c+ H* a P Pi H 3 c+ O' o^ 3) H* to 3 3 P 3 p 1 • u

225

Oq H 3 d H P M K 8 3 O 3 § 8 C+ c+ P d o 3 O S g O P P p W P B %* 3? el P • 1 O H p 3 t— P p h. C P w 3 3 d d 3 < & 3 *d O P P p o d 3“ 3* P d d > 3 3 3 d o o P 3 P d p p P. TO H £ w w 3 B d 3 d O t-+> P l Pi P o *d ft P P Oq p 3 ra 3 o rt- W 3 3 H v$ Pi 3 p p 3 o V) » H 3 3 O w I— w p c+ 3 O P p l o 3 • w 3 3 3 d tv p S-d P 3 w 3* P 3 3 p w Oq P oq O 3

B 3 c+ O p P pi P 2! P 3 3* P 3 3 n O Pi P H pi w O P c+ P to B P Pi o H £ H d o p P • p p d O >d «d c+ d -• H d P o 5 I p o Pi B P t* B 3^3 p H H, P 3 d 3 d «f £ pj W w 3 P O o' I d B P P P

o 3 3 w 3 *< M 3 oq K 1-3 d d d S'd 3 P O O P O p P W p p P o O 3 d cj 3 3 3 W > d p o < d 5 3 • o • 3 tv p 3 H 3 oq oq P w p • P • M p g Pi p < cn 3 C— H » d P tv 3 O *d d p 3 3 tv • P 3 3 3 3 O P 3 P 3 P 3 P P O p d Pi Pi Pi 3 oq M 3 3 H3 tv p P 2 3 Pi 3 P Pi C+ P 3 O O *< Pi O

a t-3 3o M O> d w P g»

H qfc D n ^

226

H P C_^. p P H- od P p P ro H- H- O «4 3" K 3 3 P 0) H* Pi ? r sr s' P «4 Pi P c+ H o P P P p o h- cn 0) c+ cn c+ c+ 3 P- p w =-*• • O {V • V) a Pi P H- 3* P o P P 3 p 3 3“ cn 4 f P C P 3 «< ^4- Pi o Pi H H* W o H- <0 3 d < H P H- 5+ Od “ ODOd 3 p. — P 9 cn 3 0 p 8 4r- P Pj P H- a o 3* bd a Cn H- P 3 O 3 p 0) d 3 o 3“ § S3 H o o 3 O cn P p P O P o P cn g 5 C+ O 3 B cn cn oo o' P P cn cn p P P h* P 3 3* 3 p S S P a 3 Pj O O' 3 o P cn H* 3l I—1 h3 cn 1 cn 3> c+ 3 m 0> & H- o q 3t

Pi p < 3 c+ ct- g Od ni 3 o P P P Pi o K t-3 P 3 fl> a> 3" O' H* p* p P 5 p 3 3 H O 0) M 3 O (D p H* p c+ 3 H- 3 P Pi O CO H* H- H 3 > a Pi 3 B p 3 ct* ct- • o • o O £ cn p Od a 3 H- cn Od B c+ CO ct 3* w p | p H- C+ H- 3 p • p P p cn • ct- i 3 o P Od 3) C+ (V ro c+ • -~3 H » Od H ct- C+ p 3 3) • o p o p U) H- *4 =tfc 3' 3 vn H* p o' M> 3 3 cn o O "d ro s*—'' cn p cn P Od 3 6 C+ B H- ct- 3 cn cn c+ c+ C+ 3 o O — 3' 3' p a C+ 3 p C+ P cn ct- 3“ a p cn C+ p P P P p H C** S' o p 3 K o X n P a O p p P 3' H- O C+ d *<4 o' 3' H- < p 3 H- p 3 3 O P p O Pi H o £ Pi — cn ct- 3 P P i o cn a Od H P 3 3' 3 H- — H Pi P 1 H* ct- cn c+

c+ cn o O Pi 3) OO p c+ d H- cn ct- a ct- O o P O P ct- O K t-3 •3 S' ct- o' o 3 X 3" p 3 P S' o o d 3 X P P S' 3 P W H* C_i. *3 ct- p 3 3 P P 3 3 p P 3 t, p ct- w > 3 H- Pi p *• P i-3 H cn p ct- ct- B g B cn w • 3- o H- 3 P o ct- ,3 P d Od p P P P O d ct- M> ct- O 3 C+ Pi H* p P 3 p B 3 3 3 3> H O 3“ fxi 3 3) ct- H- *3 H- 3 p o P • 3 • « P H- ct- O P H » cn P cn < 3 cn C+ o ct- ct- cn w B cn 3* 3 c+ • P P P o o H- 3* H- p 3- >3 P P P w H p • P 3 Pi H- < ro P t-3 p 3 3 P p M LO H* X o cn p P 3 P p o' 3 31 3 P a H- H 3' 3* 3 3 H cn H P Od cn cn P P P ct- o cn ct- p Od 3 P V# • H- H cn i-3 H 3 g P H- H- M S' cn P ct- O O • ct- H* B 3 ’d H P § X cn B O O o d cn O' 3 < o 3 P 3 P P p 1 3 3 O P cn p • ct- 3 p H P 3 O H Od H- *<; ct- cn 3 o 1 3 H- d 3 p S' 3 P- o P ct- H H cn ct- <<: P cn _£Q_

P p H g cn p cn O p *< * 3 3 P P P p P P 3 o p o c+ cn P 3 p 3 d P 3 cn > p P S' P cn o P P 3 • O H 3 p S' P p 3 cn a H P H- P H- 3 H- 3 P M P 3 P H* 3 P H P P H » o H < Od cn H- • 3) c+ P • P ffi 3 B P P *<4 H- *: d Jr- P o 3 O P ro H* CD H c+ P u> 3 cn P y P P ^ a H* o' o P o P O K H P 3 cn a 3 H> 3 p H* H P c+ p p P O a P 1 H P S' <4 P c p 3 p P a H- 1 p p H N a H* P p p 227

&> H on U)

c+ c+ cn *9 3 S' S' P c+ P ^ p *-i < d 3 C+ d O S B p oq o C+ H- P p c+ H 3 H- 1 • c+ m c+ S' c+ 5 d 3 P cn & d W c+ H* H* c+ C+ 3* d P I 1 P H* to S' c+ t—1 to 3 c+ Pi 3 M c+ W H* cn d 3“ cn O H- H* 3 s' c+ P S' Pi H- o S' p P Pi p S' (0 B p H* to 3 3 ro to p 3 P o H- 3 3 H- 3 P H» 3 P H* p H cn cn p. M> o p 3 B H- c+ c+ Oq d cn cn < W 9 H — P S' O 3 3) 3 Pi O c+ • O H* B cn 3 o c+ cn o' o P P c+ H* H- P to Mj 3> *<: g 3 3 •d co Pi p S' H- £ 3 P 3 H* Pi S' p 3 Pi P Mj >d P p P P 3 CD cn -F' O o' S' < O p cn P 3 3 H* 3 c+ d o H P P f+ H 3 3 <- < 3 P 3 3 P "S 3 P P I P M P Ol P M, 3 c+ Pi < d P c+ cn cn oq p o' cn d to H c+ <+ c+ S' < O p H OJ B cn S3 P S' 3 >d cn cn H c? 3 o P P p p p 3 TO p 3 O • c+ co d H* pr cn H* H- O P c+ 3 H- O h- p H' . 0 P 3 • o' cn S H* PT 0-0 3 H Mj S' 1 3 c+ 4 p o 0 c+ Pi i P ro 5. 1 oq 1 1 O to i H H* c+ d H d p c+ H cn vj 3* 3 1 i TO c+

Pi O^ P P cf o ro cn cn "T 3 d s H a cn P H- M> oq H- ro o ct* o p 3 3 3 S' o p S' ^ o B M) d P c+ — H- O cn 3 O H- P c+ •s^ p H* 5 o p S' Pi Pi cn p 3 3 P o M) 3 P W o c+ 3 3 H- 3 o Pi to cn P P P 3 C+ cn oq S' 3 TO O H Pi 3 o s: 3 p O' < 3 P 3 p S' Pi o p P p d O d p p n to P H- p cn P cn oq H* p H* H- H- 3 < 3 p cn c+ P < o o cn s 3 o S' p 3 to c+ P H- P P ct- p 3 0 3 3 cn ^ H- 3 3 c+ < P X p 3 3 Pi 3 H* to C+ p oq H* to p 3 S' p S' S' ct* oq C+ 3 *< O cn cn < 3 3 H* JV 3 d p o 3 cn O p X p P H* 3 P S' Pi O H- H* cn 3 oq 3 P O 3 3 C+ P H- o tn C+ O 3 p H- C+ d P 3 O OO oq 3 O oq P 3) H- 3 *d Pi d p 3 3 P c+ H- v ^ cn £ Pi 3) P P S' P H cn P S' M Pi Pi O • B S' c+ oq p 3 H* P P 1 p £3 H- 3 S' P i o •d p ‘ 3 c+ cn 1 B p S 1 & cn

o oq H H* to < 3 *d H n Q c+ 0 O ro O *d H d H- P c+ H- P P 3 d 3 P M> M> S' 3 M 3 3 P O' P P cn O H* P P > C_u Pi 1 H P H o' cn d s P d h3 3 o. O O c+ P 1 P H H- d P H- d cn o oq d O pc p O 3 3 H N Pi o O o H- p Pi 3' g 3 cn O M) P H* o s < Hi H P cn H* P a P 3 c+ O P c+ O 3 o 3 3 S' p O H P d uo 3 3 H* P p t—1 3 o d P O c+ P H- =«: * o p P O Pi p tv d 5 K c+ 3 00 O c+ cn d Hi 3 H n «# g pi o H- P H- 3 H> C+ c+ to 3 3 ro P c+ to p p S' c+ 3 3 cn O H* O c+ S' P c+ - *• cn d Pi c+ 3 *d o d Pi P 3 O d to S' to 3 H- P p c Pi c+ to 3 o' O g *d P S' P cn 3 O o' p P p d P o c+ p 1 o P H p w • 1 3 3 3 P 3 P H 1 1 p cn 1 H

d c+ p £ <+ M> £ c+ d H S' P H p S' 3 C H* 3 S' 5 V ' P < — W 3 P P P O p P Pi cn d P > c+ 3 3 P- P B p TO o d 3 H3 O P cn to 3 P d P P O P d & - oq H- P 3 • g H- p to H- vi 3 t* p c+ 3 P P H t—1 c+ 3 to P c+ H a H- P to u> 3 H- < £ H* Pi S' P 3 O to s ^ c+ c+ p 3 P O • P !V =«fc c+ • O t-> P *< cn Pi 3 P d P c+ TO M H- o' S' P c+ ro 3 P h* a P H c+ Pi cn P H- fQ O x— TO c+ P c+ 3 d c+ dO S' P p P aq O p H p 3 c+ P cn to p Mj 3 p d Pi S' 3 1 K H- i P 3 3 P 228

Post-Test Interview Questions

1. Do you feel that you satisfied your objectives in teaching the unit? * &

2. Would you vant to continue teaching the unit in the same way in the future?

3. What were some of the outstanding materials you used which evoked the strongest reactions from your students? h. In what ways did you use ideas, sources, visitors, from disciplines outside the social studies department?

5. Should some form of moral education be taught in the classroom?

6. Any additional comments? 229

RESPONSES

(GIVEN

POST-INTERVIEW

DURING

THE

THIRD

QUESTIONS

AND

GIVEN

FOURTH

ONE

WEEKS

WEEK

AFTER

APRIL,

THE

1978) UNIT

WAS

COMPLETED 230 231 ' —

232

* * 3 3 F- CO K t-3 P c+ 3> 9 H O 3 p ' 3 3 O CO 3 p F- 4 P P 3 • << V o CD p H O 3 P Pb c+ Pj pl 35

co cr s o' O' O (I O H £ |3 c+ c+ P P (t 3 H P 3 H O H* o' vj ry CO p p 3 3 o c+ c+ p 3 C+ o' cn P 3 C+ < Pb F^ F- " 0 roi o H-W 3 4 cn P o 3 S' 4 p 3 P P c+ P P p C+ c+ O ^ p p • P H P 3 P c+ cn p 3 p *3 0 c+ CO < o P c+ cn (D *# 3 H 3 • p <+ 3 F* p c+ p 3 H» * ' O F* 3 P 3 rt- F* CO O 3 3 0 < F- F* F- 3 <* 3 H 0 P P cn < cn c+ cn >3 c+ >3 P CO 31 F- H H > o p 3 CO C0 3 F 3 3 CO o 3 *d P 3 o 3 3 O P 3 p c+ rt- F- 3 P c+ 3 CM F- c+ CO * V N CM < CO 3 Pb C+ o' p p P P 3 F* CD CO O F* P p 3 p rt- d Pb H- CO I 3 3 CO 3 rt- o <<: o . (U 3 • rt* S' rt- 1 CD p

C_w M 3 CM rt- K C_u 3 W O ro 3 H p. o c+ F- 3 o P 5 p P 3 O m o' - F* co F* o 3 O < J> • CO $ Pb Pb b# c+ rt- c+ « 3 p P H o c+ P o CO M P P 3 _j p. 3 P • o' uo CM N c+ CO c+ W CO p 3 3 3 P F- 1 p a rt- c+ 3 c+ p F- 3 1 P 3 p Pb 3 K 3 H 3 3 *3 3) 3 P =«»: p Pb O F* CO p P O 3 3 c+ U) o 3 3 P O c+ CO CO o Pb M p O O P 3* F> 3 3 co 3 3 CM P 1 — rt- CM O S' c+ 3 CO CO 3 1 CO • F) O 3 3 as P 3 F- O CO p 3 cn rt- rt- Pb Pb H | 3 3 P C+ 0 S' 3 3 CO o M p o • Fj

Pb O CO 0 c+ M o m f- o' Pb < F} 3 ro P H >— O 3 3 p p rt- O o 3 P F- F- 3 3 H • o F* 3 S' 3 F- OP P c+ O M > 3 3" 3 6p F- 3 P o CO 3 0 rt- S 3 o O 3“ O co 3 O' O F- 3 P Ul F- K c+ F* C+ CO POOS <+ 3 0 P 3 3 3 W 0 p 3 -POP S' P O P a P p Pb p p v# 3 F* o rt- 3 rt- 3 3 J Pb pb O P C+ o F* 3 3 F £ 3 p p- c+ 3 3 Pb P F- 0 P P m P * Fj p 3 p F* P c+ 3 3 3 S' 3 c+ CO 3 3 3 O co F- P CO F- P m F- rt- 3 OP c+ 3" 3 3 F* P pb w O CO < 3 31 P O Pb p o ro o o O p P 3 3* F* F* rt- ^ P 0 F* F* 3 F- F* 3 • P CO o" p 3 3 F- w p P W P 3 p C+ 3 Pb P 3 P 3 H H P 3 P OP rt- O P 3 c+ O o F- rt- P H • F- o 3 rt- • Pb O 3 o M 3 p 3 o H* P H V O 3 rt- P 3 F- O 3 3 a << a P 3 w p 3 3 O 09 • OP O CO 3- 1 3 < cn F, 1 1 '

233

m h- Pj O pi u> 3 cf p cf M, 3 o' c 3 t-3 to o' 3 P 3 P n> to H 3 3 O w V O P O' 44 O 3 cn O' OtJ p> to P • 3 < c+ P c+ p c+ 1 cf cf • P 2 P K to 3 CO o S' 3 tv 3 O s £ P 3 3 p 3 o po O 3 3 O' 3 H " 3 P P P 3 g 4 P 3 P P o 3 1 Hj £ P P- O P Pi H* P 3 H- 3 3 tv 3 o cn p CF) CO (F) CO 3 S' £ • cn cn P 3 P O 2 P O' 44 c+ C+ O 3 c+ Pi fD to 3 £ 3 4 3 O' P P O O CO to • O' 3 P • Pi > p S' o 3 CO P o O pi 3 fD * P p p 3 P 3 CF) p 3 3 H* 3 to fD 3 3 no p Pi p. 3 a c+ P 3 H O O CO cn P H o' — to co 3 CF) < H Pi H* < S' O {D P P O p 3 P 00 3 3 P P 0) P 3 3 3 < to c+ POO 0 O O 3 < CO cf P V P O' cf to cf o' < H* co o H 3 3 P o H* X P p acf Pi C+ p o P p P Pi 44 cf p to I o O o 3 P o 3 p H- p p H P 3 co 3“ 3 H 3 H 43 H* 3 fD £ p cn o 3 3 n 3 c+ O' 3 co p o t £ P 3) p H 3* P M P H CD £ S' £ to O P to H* p P to cf o 3) 3 £ . 3 3 H 3) H CO C+ cn 3 o 3> Mj H 3 Pi 3 S' V* cn w O p S' P H* S' c+ 3 H* hf CO P to 3 N O 3 3 3 3 S' H* H- ro p w P O P cf H o 3 o cf S' 3 3 P o p Pi P cf pj 3 3 £ P 3 CF? Cf cf co CO O 3) P p p O to O O Z? Pi CO •• o OP C+ P i-3 o 3 to o C! cf 3 3» n O S' < 3 CO H- O' M p p c+ 1 3 < P 3 o O o O p S' P Ui 43 H- 3 P o co 3 ^ fD CO P 3 Pi 3 P 3 o cf cf cf 3 p p CO cf it 3 3 & cf P cf H (/) N t—* 43 o c+ o S' 3 i cf p cf S' P p P P 3- £ 3 o B P i § g < fD p p 3 cf p H- 3 a 6 p 3 6 P 1 p 3 3 3 H* p o cf p 3 cf 3 co < 3 3 3 P to c+ cf cf 3 3 Pi £ 2 P C+ cn to o 1 cn X* 3 H- o P • p o' P cf • 1 p

1 - z 1 31 U) 3 O O' 44 P ct a H- 3 H o 3 p p H- H- P i-3 "— P H o o P 3 p 3 £ p p 3 O P £ 3 P H W p 3 3 o' O hj o p c+ Pi £ c+ 3 o o 3 3 P H H- to Pi o C > H o' G H* co < to cr H< O c+ O P Pi c+ H* H- £ 3 tV to — O P co o p to o CO P CO co 44 3 S' H p P <; 3 P H> K • 3 H> H* P 3 o 3 B w 3 P c+ o' P 3 3 H- (F) P< M 2 s* P P 3> p P H* 3 O c+ 3 to 3 Pi Pi to P CO a c+ 3> o c+ H 3 S' P 3) P 44 | O c+ £ c pi V H- H- O f P 3 H* 3 fV 3 CO P 3) Pi o a p o O 3 H to P p 3 P CO P P H- P Pi P H- p H S' < P U) c+ 3 Pi p H* c+ c+ 3 1 O P Pi S' 3 = to H* H P H* O P c+ o 3 H- 3 & 83 3 o p Hi CO O P £ £ 3 O 3 3 < c+ c+ H* £ P o 3 CF) to to • S' 3 P H* 3 Pi | p c+ H- O' c+ 3 3) CO 3 P H- £ B P to to P CO 3 O P p 3 • S' H* 44 O 3 44 p £ 3 0 3 H O O p v# • 3 o p 3 O p O S' cn £ 3 *4 H" 3) P B cc 5V ro Pi 3 44 £ Pi O H* CD P to 3 H* cf H- H- CF) M o' co 3 H- H- 3> P P P 2 3 3 1 C+ S' C+ 3 3 cf P H- H» CO 3 CO to • V# « P 1 .f? P H- p 1 O o 3 O' P | S* • *< H CO H H* CO X* H* P H | H* B o Pi H to 1 Pi m 1

P p o P Hi a 44 3 < O P CO 44 3 3 3 O 3 O to Pi H- H (F) • a P S' p w £ P H* K B H- P 3 p 3 p M 3 & g O 44 to H P 3 1 3 H* a P CF) B £ P CF) O H P P O to CO • p p o Pi P 3 3, o 3 3. 3 3 P c+ P 3 (F) S' 3 | o' P -3 cn p H 3 P 3 p • B H- (F) £ P O 3 H P o P' O o CO P to 3 £ 3 O o P 3> CO P O O' 3 3 3 pi 3 < O Pi £ £ P P (F) O S' P £ (5 o < O P 3 P P O' P a 3 P* P P o' (F) 3 P 3 P tv • O „ (S 3 £ O to 3 P 1 P £ O 1 3 H* P 3 3 .

23^4

appendix f

Answer Key and Memoranda Provided for the Raters TO: The Raters

FROM: Roselle Chartock

RE: Answer Key: Pilot-Test on the Holocaust

Thank you for your willingness to assist me in my doctoral research. Please correct the enclosed tests which have been pilotted by twenty- three hign school students. I have provided an Answer Key below which should take into account all of the possible answers you will encounter. Scoring for each item is also provided.

The purpose of your scoring these tests is to help me discover:

1 . any problems with the wording of the questions, i.e. do the students seem to understand what is being asked or do their answers reflect confusion?

2 . any problems with my Answer Key, i.e. do I provide a broad enough range of answers; and, are there some answers given by students which seem correct but are unaccounted for in the Key?

3 . any revisions that need to be made in light of the above—or other—problems

Thank you so much for your assistance.

I hope that one week will be sufficient for correcting the tests. Please keep track of the number of hours you devote to this task.

Many of the test items have been left unanswered , since all of the students involved in the pilot project are unfamiliar with the Holocaust material for which this test was designed. Therefore, I estimate you will probably need approximately five hours or less to correct the five major questions.

Again, thanks so much.

If you need to call me for any reason, my phone number is 528-U199.

I welcome all criticism and comment . Please make note of any problems or suggested changes you would recommend. Thank you.

Roselle 235

June 15, 1978

Dear Rater,

Enclosed are 88 pre- and post-tests. Now that the reliability of the tests has been established (.92) —thanks to your efforts the remainder of the tests can now be corrected using the Answer Key most recently given to you.

I would appreciate your following these directions while correcting the tests:

1. Next to each question number, please place the total number of points allotted to that question.

2. Add up all of these points and place the final score for the test at the top of the test —upper right-hand corner next to the test number. Circle this final score.

3. After the tests have been corrected, please record the

scores ( both total scores and item scores) on the separate sheet of paper I have given you. Again, see labelled columns on the accompanying score sheet so you'll know where each score should be inserted.

Thank you so much for your participation in this project. I never could have gotten this far without your serious and sympathetic attention to these evaluation procedures.

Let me know if you need more than the 11/2 months for correcting. I'll be calling you towards the end of July.

Thanks again, and good luck!

Roselle 236

TEST ff : CORRECTION FORM

(FOR SETS OF TESTS USED IN ESTABLISHING RELIABILITY)

TO—RATER: For each of the items below please indicate points awarded and the part of Answer Key you used in your scoring.

A. Problem: Prejudice

First Idea:

Second Idea:

Third Idea:_

Fourth Idea:

Fifth Idea:

B . Problems Related to Past and Contemporary Issues:

Questions provided by student:

1 .

C. Short Essays: 1. Holocaust

First Idea:

Second Idea:

Third Idea:

Fourth Idea:

Fifth Idea:

2. Dump (Bypass)

First Idea:

Second Idea:

Third Idea:

Fourth Idea: .

Fifth Idea: 237

ANSWER KEY

A. Problem: Prejudice, a concept from the Holocaust used to test the application by students of interdisciplinary thinking:

The purpose of this question is to determine the ability of students to integrate ideas from different perspectives by having them list the necessary steps they think a President should take to bring about a country free from prejudice or intolerance of others' differences.

The Key on Page 2 is made up of a set of ideas which have been grouped into l4 disciplines. Give the student 2 points for every discipline s(he) uses. If a student uses a discipline more than once, give him an additional point, i.e. this diagram may clarify the scoring:

2 points = per discipline 1 point = repeated use of a discipline

(The disciplines have been grouped under broader categories, but these headings are not to be considered in scoring.) 238

KEY: POSSIBLE ANSWERS FOR A.

Two points for an answer from each discipline; for one additional point a second answer from same column.

religious leaders and writings preach brotherhood and the universal values shared by all mankind teach respect for religious beliefs of others though different from one's own have books and courses which teach about minorities and respect for different peoples' race, religion, ethnic group or other differences integrate all schools racially (and ethnically and religiously)

CQ hire teachers who are from different groups of people w help students relearn ideas about people if they have o learned to be prejudice from their family provide S3 education for families who may be teaching their W children prejudice with or without knowing it H erase poverty and O other social factors which lead to crime and attacking others or causing intergroup friction CQ allow for intermarriage* (see end of "KEY") encourage opportunities for different people to meet socially (i.e. opening clubs to all peoples) show how the family is often the key "teacher" of prejudice being passed on to children housing and neighborhoods should be integrated and decent for all enable all people to have jobs or income so they will not be tempted to scapegoat or act aggressively towards others as a result of their economic problems advance people in their jobs by ability once the previous < harm done by economic prejudice has been eliminated H open unions and corporation jobs (etc.) to people equal- O ly capable of handling positions o civil rights CQ have laws passed which increase have laws which at least control existing prejudice appoint leaders who stand for equal rights allow everyone to have a voice in government

show what terrible things happened in history as a result of prejudice 239

1. Publish books which teach about respect for differences Literature . publish books which have characters from different and/or which groups reveal the heritage and contribution feelings and of different groups of people

COMMUNICATIONS 1 ^ve television and radio * programs which center around the lives of people from different groups so as to inform everyone about different groups Media 2. have programs and ads which transmit respect for different peoples —a kind of propaganda for love 3. use all kinds of people in advertisements 1. reveal the psychological causes of prejudice so people ^ 11 "^6 aware of these and be on guard Psychol- ogy

E 1. keep C standards of health and access to medicine equal Health N for all so no one, however poor, will be discriminated E against in terms of health and welfare I 1. have scientists continue to show how the brain and SC blood of one race is no better than that of another Biology race

& 1. create machinery which will enable people to learn more quickly about people in other parts of the country (i.e. film-making techniques advanced)

Technology Physics 2. create transportation which can get people together faster

1. have songs and art which transmit the message of equal-

Art ity and respect for different peoples & 2. give all different ethnic and religious and racial groups opportunities to collect and exhibit the music- ARTS al and artistic contributions they have made to Amer- Music ica

# "Sociology—2." If student proposes any kind of step which implies equalization among people, you may give him 2 points. For example, although "intermarriage" (racially, religiously) does not imply maintenance and respect for differences, such an answer does indicate the student's sensitivity to equality and tolerance. ) ) 2 1

21*0

KEY: POSSIBLE ANSWERS FOR B.

Holocaust-Related Probl ems and Contemporary and Past Issues Two dilemmas are presented to the student in #1 and H2. The students are required to show their recognition of similarities between each pair of dilemmas by writing two questions they would ask themselves if they were faced with the given dilemmas. Assign 3 points for each appropriate question they ask. Thus a total of 6 points (a, b = is 6) possible for ft and 6 points for #2. (However, if the student writes two questions next to a. or b. please assign , 6 points to the item. An example of this kind of answer would be: Should I obey the law or follow my personal convictions?” This can really be broken down into two separate questions, thus allowing for a possible 6 points. A student offering such a two-part response for a. and b. could earn a total of 12 points. (Please do not give credit for repetition of same question.

KEY: #1. a., b., and # a., b. (#1 version appeared on the Pre-test; #2 version appeared on the Post-test)

#1. Possible questions which might indicate the student's grasp of the relationships between the dilemmas faced by two teenagers: (3 points each)

a. Should I endanger or risk my own life? b. Should I save myself while I watch my countrymen (and friends) endanger their lives (for my country's sake? c. Am I endangering my family in any way if I disobey the laws of my country? d. Should I follow the law (i.e. my country)? e. Is my country always right (even when it endangers the lives of innocent human beings)? f. Is my country's policy right or wrong? g. Can I save more innocent lives by breaking my country's laws? h. When should I disobey (the laws of) my country? i. Is my love of country stronger than my own convictions about saving my life and the lives of others?

j . Should I speak out against the policy of my country because I feel it's wrong? k. Will I be hurting my country by refusing to obey its laws or will I be helping it by disobeying? l. Should I listen to my own conscience (personal convictions? 2kl

m. Is there a higher law than that of my country? n. How much do I really care about this dilemma?

#2 . Possible questions which indicate the student's grasp of the similarities between the dilemmas faced by the two manufacturers: (3 points each)

a. Should I risk financial loss? b. Should I consider the effects of my financial loss on my family if I should decide not to sell the weapons? c. What does ray family think about my selling weapons to a racist government? d. Should I be more concerned for the welfare of my own workers than for human equality in other countries? (How would my workers survive if I laid them off?) e. Should I be more concerned for human equality than for ray own welfare and those close to me? ^^-11 & decision to stop selling really make much of a difference in the racist government's actions? g. Should I be concerned about the treatment of all people (who are not ray own countrymen)? h. Should I encourage other manufacturers to stop selling weapons to these countries also? i. Should I speak out against the racist policies? j . Should I listen to my conscience (which tells me to stop contributing indirectly to racism)? k. Should I reconsider my role in life and alter the line of goods I produce so as to never contribute to weapons production here or abroad?

Note: You may notice that the questions in the answer key are organized heirarchically beginning with the student's concern for personal safety and rights and ending with concern for all peoples ' safety and rights. Similarly, the concern for law comes before the question of obeying one's conscience. According to Lawrence Kohlberg, Harvard psychologist who has carried on research related to moral development in children, a child is first self-centered and his own "laws" are the right ones for him. Then he develops respect for the laws of authority, i.e. government, and then sometimes goes beyond these to a level of morality in which he recognizes higher moral laws which may go beyond the laws of his own country. One's personal convictions or conscience may dic- tate disobeying laws for either self-centered or more morally-based reasons involving a sense of the rights of all people. However, in the Key, credit is to be given to students who offer any kind of recognition of the role of conscience and personal conviction. 242

KEY: POSSIBLE ANSWERS FOR C. Two Essays

#1. Why did "the Holocaust happen?

Scoring : The Key below is divided into 10 disciplines. If a student taps a discipline once, assign two points to that answer. If the student taps a discipline more than once, add an additional point each time, i.e. Diagram for scoring:

2 points=per discipline 1 point=repeated use of a discipline

Not£: If a student mentions an answer that is listed under more than one discipline (as in the case of "anti- Semitism"), try to determine the way in which the student is perceiving the term since s(he) can only receive credit once for the term even though it may be listed under more than one discipline.

1. Anti-.r mitic passages in the theological writings of of Chr stianity 2. Hitler's use of RELIGION Nazism as religion (himself as Savior and God) 3. ancient German myths of a super-race

1. the advanced German technology used by scientists and architects in building efficient death factories 2. experiments showing territorial nature of fish—and SCIENCE man 3. the Lebensborn movement: to biologically breed a pure Aryan race 1. Germany's history of lost wars and lost pride 2. a long history of European anti-Semitism 3. a history of no democracy in Germany 4. the Treaty of Versailles after World War I HISTORY 5. history of militarism and respect for authority in Germany 6. nationalism in Germany 7. Hitler's desire to rule Europe (and world) 8. Lebensborn: breed a super-race of Aryans (Germans) 1. experiments shoving man to be obedient when given orders from an authority figure 2. experiments showing man's territorial nature R. the psvchology of prejudice and anti-Semitism (scape-

PSYCHOLOGY goating; stereotyping) 4. fear of Hitler's wrath and power 5. insecurity of Germans caused them to believe promises; also loss of pride) 1 n

2U3 ANSWER KEY C.l. — continued

1. jjfietzsche * s superman philosophy was used by Hitler to inspire Germans to follow him 2. Machiavelli ' s ideas of "ends Justify means" 3. Hobbes and his ideas of man as basically evil and PHILOSOPHY greedy U. Man’s nature is verv eompi 5. Hitler's own philosophy of Nazism which stressed Aryan racial superiority and pnv*T. 1. no books by Jews or critical of Germany were an loved 2. the myths of a super-race inspired German LITERA- TURE their superiority 3. Nietzsche s writings on nihilism and "supermen" e» 1. Hitler banned all art and music by Jews O 2. Hitler hired E-t H artists to paint and write works fur— S| thering Nazism, nationalism, and militarism 1. there was in Germany a severe economic CO depression O following World War I S 2. people were hungry and jobless in Germany follow- ua ing World War I 0 3. the treasury W was drained due to payment of repar- ations

1. all media was controlled by Hitler and punishment 1 M CO and censorship of dissent of any kind was enforced 5 0 2. Hitler's speeches and written news were propagan- 2 Eh da for the Nazi cause; O < people knew no other opinion O O or reality

1. Hitler created a totalitarian regime; no other political party could exist CO0 2. the attempt to create a democratic government H (Wiemar) failed CH M 3. no effort to halt Hitler's plan from other govern-

1— 0 ments in the world 4. Hitler's regime promised wealth, pride, and power to Germans )

02. Selectmen's meeting on the dump location question.

Scoring : The Answer Key below has been divided into perspectives similar to the traditional disciplines but differing in some terminology. Score in the same way indicated in Essay 01. That is, two points for every perspective tapped by the student and an additional point for a second use of a perspective.

will the dump be fairly accessible to the majority of townspeople? iz; o Will the dump cheapen my property? KCO Will the dump be §W close to a school (etc.) thus increas- P-. ing traffic around it and possibly endangering children's lives? o Will the smell be so bad as to disturb me when I'm out- o side? CO Will the dump be in my backyard?

Will the dump be built so as to prevent unnecessary pol- o lution and health hazards to people? Will the soil and/or water be endangered? (i.e. poison) T) O a o Will the dump harm the environment in any way? aJ W Will the dump be harmful to soil, land, air or other parts of natural environment?

5 - Is recycling a better alternative in terms of ecological concerns?

6 . Will the dump cause an imbalance in nature?

1. What will the cost of the dump be? o 2 . How much will the salaries of the workers be? M 3 . How much space will be required? CJ o U. Will the dump cheapen personal property and thus de- o crease land and house values around it? a waste of our o 5 . Is the dump really necessary or is it w money? o Eh 6 . Is a dump the best method of garbage disposal?

O 7. Would recycling or land-fill methods ( etc . be better SZ o than a dump in terms of cost (or efficiency)? w 8 . How long would the dump last and be useable? 2l<5 ANSWER KEY C.2. — continued

1 1 * 11 Pe°Ple informed as y. - to the pros and cons of such a dump? 2. Will the dump be supervised with town money, and ir , POLITICAL what will be the cost to each taxpayer? 3. Will residents of the town be hired as builders of and workers at the dump or will you hire outsiders? 4. Will the contract go up for bids? 5. Will the dump be open to people outside of this town? If so, will they be ): charged? 1. Will the dump be designed in an attractive way or be an eye-sore?

(aesthetic ARTISTIC 2. Will it be located away from attractive neighborhoods and historical sites so as not to blemish these areas? 2146

H2. Selectmen's meeting on the dump location question.

Scoring : The Answer Key below has been divided into perspectives similar to the traditional disciplines but differing in some terminology. Score in the same way indicated in Essay Hi. That is, two points for every perspective tapped by the student and an additional point for a second.

1. Will the bypass be accessible to the majority of people and be to the advantage of the majority in general? (i.e. in terras of making their travelling easier, etc.) 2. Will the bypass endanger peoples' safety in terms of PERSONAL traffic hazards? and 3. Will the location displace peoples' houses and force people to move?

14 . Will the sounds of traffic be so bad as to disturb SOCIAL people living on or near the bypass? 5. Will the bypass be in my backyard? 6. How will the bypass affect the population? 1. Will the bypass add to pollution and cause health haz- B ards to people? TW 2. How much destruction of the natural environment (i.e. CK land, soil, water) will result? aJ 3. Are there better locations for rerouting traffic in >h O terms of ecological concerns than the proposed location? vA b. Will the bypass cause an imbalance O in nature? O 5. Will the environment of the towns that are bypassed be w improved (i.e. because of the absence of cars)? 1. What will the cost of the bypass be and how will it affect the individual taxpayer? 2. How much will the salaries of the workers be? a 3. How much space will be required? wo I4 property and thus de- o . Will the bypass cheapen personal o crease land and house values around it? o 5. Is the bypass really necessary or is it a waste of our will it really benefit the people and be T) O money, i.e. c w investment (i.e. will it significantly aj Eh worth the o shorten distances)? 6. Will individual towns affected by the bypass benefit o s from the bypass economically (i.e. will businesses ben- o efit economically or suffer)? w 7. How long will it take to build the bypass (as affecting inconvenience and in terms of job contracts)? ANSWER KEY C.2. — continued

1. What will the role be of the individual town govern- ments in terns of supervising construction and oversee- ing operations? 2. Will a residents of the affected towns be hired as build- o ers of and workers on the bypass or will outsiders be hired? 3. Will o the construction contract go up for bids? PL, Will people be informed as to the pros and cons of such a bypass? 5. Will speeds be checked and laws be enforced in terms of speeding and following traffic signs?

1 . Will the bypass be landscaped and designed in an attractive way or simply be a mass of concrete with no vegetation replaced? o o H -H 2. Will it be located away from attractive neighborhoods H -p CO <1) and historical sites so as not to blemish these areas? M Xi H -p 3. Will the beauty or nature of the area in which the by- « W

2U8

appendix g

Problem-solving Methodologies

Below are excerpts from several works In which problem- solving, discussion, and moral reasoning development are inter related.

One of the main goals of any curricula should he to help students develop the ability to make intelligent decisions so that they can resolve problems and, through social action, influence public policy. Sound decisions (courses of action) cannot be made in a vac- uum; they must be based on knowledge . . . The intelligent social activist must be able to identify and clarify his values before he can solve personal and social problems rationally.

Each field of study has a mode of inquiry and key concepts which are appropriate to particular problems . . . However, knowledge and modes are not sufficient for sound decision-making. Interdisciplinary concepts (derived by an inquiry process), valuing, and the synthesis of knowledge and values constitute the process of decision-making. These three sets of skills must be part of the moral^reasoning process surrounding problems and issues.

The concept of structure [of the disciplines] enables us to identify the key ideas of the disciplines. These ideas are the most beneficial kind of knowledge for sound decision-making ... A curriculum that focuses on decision-making must not only teach children higher levels of knowledge, it must be interdisciplinary, and incorporate key concepts and generalizations from all the social science disciplines.

I am in agreement with Banks and Cleggs with one exception.

Interdisciplinary social science knowledge is necessary but not sufficient for rational decision-making. For most contemporary

'"James A. Banks and Ambrose A. Clegg, Jr., Teaching Strat- egies for the Social Studies (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley 1973). p. 396-397, Second Edition.

2 Ibid. , p. 27* issues and problems— and persistent life situations—are interdisciplinary from a wider perspective, and the disciplines of the natural sciences and the humanities are frequently required for illumination and resolution of problems. The authors furnish several inquiry models and strategies in their book which is primarily concerned with inquiry, valuing and decision-making. All of these models can help students identify their values and test the factual assumptions behind a qualified value position (See these models in this Appendix). These techniques, when used with

Kohlberg's stages, can provide a technique for assessing the moral reasoning levels of students vis a vis particular dilemmas or problems, thereby indicating to the teacher what (s)he might do to stimulate reasoning on a higher or more principled level.

Through discussion, the teacher might expose a level three rea- soner to level four reasoning. The majority of high school students operate from Kohlberg's stages two, three, and four, and advocate a particular response to a moral dilemma based on their desire to avoid trouble; and they tend to justify laws by traditional criteria of authority rather than by abstract legal or moral principles. The strategies given below are intended to help students become aware of alternative courses of action and the possible consequences of their action while at the same time stimulating their growth in moral reasoning at least one stage above their present level. With these processes as tools for stimulating moral reasoning, teachers can take students beyond 250 the knowledge (or cognitive) level of the material they are deal-

ing with and into the inquiry and value (affective) domain. For

in order for students to actually apply knowledge, they must

first decide how, when, and why—which involves moral decisions. o

251

tj u> w »=;t -tn I h-1 W ro P P£$ O I-*a o w a CKJ K. «• w i-3 O p o of a' H- a OQ a CO G. c+ P MODEL c+ p 1CK3 H* P FOR W

o a S3. MAKING c+ a- p •y o- co Oto o :r n DECISIONS H- & o CO rr U) c+ l» pa B H* o P W *oo n< CO p n o a a o P o 3 H 3 P c H- 3 . <+ «< H- O a r* a ro 252

u TILE DECISION-MAKING PROCESS

Decision-Problem •

What action should we take regarding race relations in our city?

1 1 Value Inquiry

1. Recognizing value problems 2. Describing value-relevant Social Inquiry behavior Key Concepts: 3. Naming values 4. Determining value conflicts Conflict 5. Hypothesizing about value Culture sources Discrimination 6. Naming value alternatives Specialization 7. Hypothesizing about r- Power consequences 8. Choosing 9. S.ating rejsons, sources, and consequences of choice

' T 3 Knowledge necessary for naming alternatives and Value clarification making predictions * I

Making a Decision

1. Identifying Alternatives 2. Predicting Consequences (Using generalizations of each alternative (using generalizations related to key concepts to related to key concepts to identify alternatives) predict consequences)

3. Ordering Alternatives (Deciding which is most consistent with value position identified above)

y Acting

(In a way consistent with values: willingness to accept possible consequences of action chosen)

Figure. lU.l 'five Decision-Making Process

Banks and Cleggs , Teaching Strategies for the Social Studies , Second Edition, p. U63. 253

Figure 13.6 5 Hanks Value Inquiry Model

1. Defining and recognizing value problems: Observation-discrimination

2. Describing value-relevant behavior: Description-discrimination - 3. Naming values exemplified by behavior described: Identification description, hypothesizing. - 4. Determining conflicting values in behavior described: Identification analysis (citing data to support 5. Hypothesizing about sources of values analyzed: Hypothesizing hypotheses) observed: Recalling 6. Naming alternative values to those exemplified by behavior values analyzed: Predicting, 7. Hypothesizing about the possible consequences of the comparing, contrasting

8. Declaring value preference: Choosing of value choice: Justifying, hypothe- 9. Stating reasons, sources, and possible consequences sizing, predicting

The teacher can employ a scries of questioning strategies to help children justify their values and identify the sources and possible consequences of them. After a child has declared a value preference, the teacher can ask the following kinds of questions: “Johnny, you said that you hate Jews?” “Do you thuik that it’s right to hate a groun of people?” “Why do you think so?” “Why do you think that you hate Jews?” “What arc some things that may happen when we hate a group of people?” “Do you think that you could accept the tilings which may happen as a result of hating a croup of people?” The teacher has to be very careful when asking questions like these so that he will not, in any wav, abuse the student or punish him for freely expressing his beliefs. Unless a the teacher will net have student is able to express his beliefs ft eely and openly, an opportunity to help him to reflectively examine them, and the type of value inquiry which we recommend will be doomed.

^Banks and Cle/rg, Teaching Strategies for the Social Studies , Second Edition, p. ^33 : .

25 1*

APPENDIX H

Interdisciplinary Studies Compared With Traditional Designs

A critical question that teachers commonly raise is: "Won't the rigor associated with traditional curricula he lost, i.e. rigor in terms of a definite sequence, structure, and the skills of inquiry?"

First, I would repeat that the interdisciplinary requirements would not replace the disciplines hut would complement them so that the capacities of students to use these disciplines is enhanced through their use in solving problems. Secondly, while differences in emphasis make for varied proposals of scope, sequence, and organization, the interdisciplinary approach shares a number of common concerns for rigor with the more traditional designs

1. Both proposals recognize and strive to develop basic

democratic values . 2. Both seek ways to help the learner become effective in

his daily life . 3. Both would develop to a high level of competence the skills needed for effective membership in a democratic society a high level of scholar- 4 . They are both concerned with ship, accurate use of facts, and deep exploration into the wealth of knowledge that today's world provides. (The only difference between the knowledge gained in a traditional subject-centered course and one focusing on an interdisciplinary problem is in the organization, emphasis, and purpose of the exploration, not in the quality of the scholarship developed.) of helping learners 5. Both proposals recognize the value of not only to see interrelationships among fields knowledge but also to understand how to bring many, lies in fields to bear on a problem. The difference Under or- whether these are primary or secondary aims. subject ganizations around problems that cut across are primary. fields, interrelationships among subjects ^ —

255

6. Both are concerned with making the most effective use of available research regarding the learner and the learning process to achieve their varied goals. Both designs, for example, are concerned with adjusting to the learners' general maturity; and both recognize that the learner grows as a whole — intellectually, emotionally, and morally.

If these are six values shared by both approaches, then what are the underlying bases for an argument stressing that interdisciplinary studies are further Justified? Underlying the decision that the best starting points are the problems and concerns of learners and society are certain basic assumptions regarding the quality of resulting learnings. These assumptions are:

1. No predetermined selection of facts is believed to be intrinsically better than some other possible choice. 2. No one organization of facts is intrinsically better than any other organization. The critical factor is that the organization be meaningful for the learner and one that he can use^ 3. Concepts and generalizations are crucial learnings if the goal is to develop the learner's ability to act ef- fectively in his world. 4. In this changing world it is important to educate for change. Thus, it is necessary to devote some of the learner's time to the techniques of problem-solving, through experiences in group and individual problem- solving and through opportunities to study how issues are resolved. 2

Rigor is not an intrinsic part of the disciplines. Rigor can characterize any kind of curricula which adheres to certain criteria: the logical organization of the content, the psychol-

— ogical significance of the content and method to the learner where the student is at; the structure, sequence, and reinforce-

of an ment possibilities of the curriculum, and the inclusion

. ^"Stratemeyer , 106-108 2Stratemeyer, 110 . 256

appropriate mode of inquiry. As long as these concerns are dealt with, the body of knowledge to be taught will maintain "discipline" without having to be one of the disciplines.

Stratemeyer (et al) reports that one of the significant implications of the Eight-Year Study by W. Aiken was that school systems could depart markedly from the traditional college-prep- aratory courses and still develop skills, information, and atti-

3 tudes essential to college success.

"’Stratemeyer , U70.